Healthcare
BE SURE TO CHECK OUT THE NEWS POSTS BELOW THE PETITION
|
|---|
The individual mandate takes congressional power and control to a striking new level. It’s also unconstitutional.
<!–
–>An Unconstitutional Tax <!–
–>Health Care Researc
http://www.heritage.org/LeadershipForAmerica/health-care.cfm
 |
Let’s Get Health Care Right | 2/24/2010
America’s health care system is in need of change, but not change that consists of overhauling one-sixth of America’s economy by centralizing health care decisions. |
Some previous charts (warnings) from Heritage:
Nation’s Health Care Tab to Grow Under Senate Bill
Democrats trying to push President Obama’s health care overhaul through the Senate received a sobering …
Is Senate ‘Compromise’ Really a Public Option on Steroids? - Yep.
Dem Senator: ‘It’s Morally Wrong to Vote Against Health Care’ - We say it’s morally wrong to push this monsterousity on us.
Unions Oppose OPM Health-Care Role
Posted by Editor on December 11, 2009 · Leave a Comment
Two leading federal workers unions want lawmakers to keep their hands off the program that provides health-care coverage to federal employees, arguing that any potential merger with a larger public health care program would jeopardize health coverage for federal workers.
Consider this: No Federal Government official should be provided any different insurance than is provided to any other citizen through Federal programs. No “Cadillac plans”. If they want better, with their salaries they can certainly afford to buy additional coverage from the private sector. Now that is if you believe they should be provided any insurance visa via the taxpayer to begin with. The Government employee on average makes just shy of $31000 more than his/her private sector counterpart (and It should go without saying that darn near the entire government is unionized). Perhaps this is the biggest issue of all in the healthcare reform debate especially with the fact that government is the only sector actually creating jobs at an average of 10000 per month. We must demand they stop hiring, start purging, and fix this wage disparity by stripping all federal employees of health coverage.They “shall be required” to buy private sector coverage, thereby stimulating the economy and alleviating the taxpayer of their burden on the healthcare system. So says the people ! (Let this serve as a petition seeking redress of these grievances)“The house of representatives…can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as the great mass of society. This has always been deemed one of the strongest bonds by which human policy can connect the rulers and the people together. It creates between them that communion of interest, and sympathy of sentiments, of which few governments have furnished examples; but without which every government degenerates into tyranny.”
- James Madison, February 19, 1788
~
More Doctors against the Healthcare bill debaucle. The following from a Rochester Tea Party
WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!
***Please read this in it’s entirety. It is imperative that we all begin reading these warnings. Everyone should read this and pay close attention.
An Indianapolis doctor’s letter to Sen. Bayh about the Bill (Note: This is a real letter from a real doctor. Dr. Stephen E. Frazer, MD practices as an anesthesiologist in Indianapolis , IN. Medical School Attended: Med Coll Of Wi, Milwaukee Wi 53226, Completed Residency At: Univ Of Wa Sch Of Med, Anesthesiology, Good Samaritan Reg Med Ctr, General Surgery.)
Here is a letter I sent to Senator Bayh. Feel free to copy it and send it around to all other representatives. — Stephen Fraser
July 23, 2009
Senator Bayh,
As a practicing physician I have major concerns with the health care bill before Congress. I actually have read the bill and am shocked by the brazenness of the government’s proposed involvement in the patient-physician relationship. The very idea that the government will dictate and ration patient care is dangerous and certainly not helpful in designing a health care system that works for all. Every physician I work with agrees that we need to fix our health care system, but the proposed bills currently making their way through congress will be a disaster if passed.
I ask you respectfully and as a patriotic American to look at the following troubling lines that I have read in the bill. You cannot possibly believe that these proposals are in the best interests of the country and our fellow citizens.
Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self-insure!!
Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill: THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!
Page 42 of HC Bill: The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!
Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Page 58 HC Bill: Govt will have real-time access to individuals’ finances & a ‘National ID Health card’ will be issued!
Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer.
Page 65 Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions & community organizations: (ACORN).
Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the ‘Exchange.’
Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans – The Govt will ration your health care!
Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. (Translation: illegal aliens.)
Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.
Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members – your health care WILL be rationed!)
Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill: Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. (No choice.)
Page 12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No “judicial review” against Govt monopoly.
Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association – The Govt will tell YOU what salary you can make.
Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan. (NO choice!)
Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part-time employees AND their families. (Employees shouldn’t get excited about this as employers will be forced to reduce its work force, benefits, and wages/salaries to cover such a huge expense.)
Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option will pay 8% tax on all payroll! (See the last comment in parenthesis.)
Page 150 Lines 9-13: A business with payroll between $251K & $401K who doesn’t provide public option will pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.
Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn’t have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes.. (Americans will pay.)
Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of the GOVT HC Admin.. will have access to ALL Americans’ finances and personal records.
Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” (Yes, it really says that!)
Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors. (Low-income and the poor are affected.)
Page 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors: It doesn’t matter what specialty you have trained yourself in — you will all be paid the same! (Just TRY to tell me that’s not Socialism!)
Page 253 Line 10-18: The Govt sets the value of a doctor’s time, profession, judgment, etc. (Literally– the value of humans.)
Page 268 Sec 1141: The federal Govt regulates the rental and purchase of power driven wheelchairs.
Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS – Cancer patients – welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever the Govt deems preventable (i.e…re-admissions).
Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt tells doctors what and how much they can own!)
Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion.. (The Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.)
Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required. (Can you say ACORN?)
Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: The Govt mandates establishment of=2 outcome-based measures.. (HC the way they want — rationing.)
Page 341 Lines 3-9: The Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. (Forcing people into the Govt plan)
Page 354 Sec 1177: The Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of ‘special needs people!’ Unbelievable!
Page 379 Sec 1191: The Govt creates more bureaucracy via a “Tele-Health Advisory Committee.” (Can you say HC by phone?)
Page 425 Lines 4-12: The Govt mandates “Advance-Care Planning Consult.” (Think senior citizens end-of-life patients.)
Page 425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. (And it’s mandatory!)
Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an “approved” list of end-of-life resources; & nbsp;guiding you in death.. (Also called ‘assisted suicide.’)
Page 427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for orders on “end-of-life.” (The Govt has a say in how your life ends!)
Page 429 Lines 1-9: An “advanced-care planning consultant” will be used frequently as a patient’s health deteriorates.
Page 429 Lines 10-12: An “advanced care consultation” may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. (AN ORDER TO DIE FROM THE GOVERNMENT?!?)
Page 429 Lines 13-25: The GOVT will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order. (I wouldn’t want to stand before God after getting paid for THAT job!)
Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end-of-life! (Again — no choice!)
Page 469: Community-Based Home Medical Services = Non-Profit Organizations. (Hello? ACORN Medical Services here!?!)
Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover marriage and family therapy. (Which means Govt will insert itself into your marriage even.)
Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, and rationing those services.
Senator, I guarantee that I personally will do everything possible to inform patients and my fellow physicians about the dangers of the proposed bills you and your colleagues are debating.
Furthermore, if you vote for a bill that enforces socialized medicine on the country and destroys the doctor-patient relationship, I will do everything in my power to make sure you lose your job in the next election.
Respectfully,
Stephen E. Fraser, MD
Dear Reader,
I urge you to use the power that you were born with (and the power that may soon be taken away) and circulate this l to as many people as you can reach. The Power of the People can stop this from happening to us, our parents, our grandparents, our children, and to following generations.
FOXNews.com
The following is a list of the “new federal bureaucracies” that the House Republican Conference claims are created in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s health care reform bill. (note: Reids’ Senate version of the bill is just as bad, with very few differences, and is some ways is even worse)
111 new “unconstitutional” federal agencies:
1. Retiree Reserve Trust Fund (Section 111(d), p. 61) 2. Grant program for wellness programs to small employers (Section 112, p. 62) 3. Grant program for State health access programs (Section 114, p. 72) 4. Program of administrative simplification (Section 115, p. 76) 5. Health Benefits Advisory Committee (Section 223, p. 111)
6. Health Choices Administration (Section 241, p. 131) 7. Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman (Section 244, p. 138) 8. Health Insurance Exchange (Section 201, p. 155) 9. Program for technical assistance to employees of small businesses buying Exchange coverage (Section 305(h), p. 191) 10. Mechanism for insurance risk pooling to be established by Health Choices Commissioner (Section 306(b), p. 194) 11. Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund (Section 307, p. 195) 12. State-based Health Insurance Exchanges (Section 308, p. 197) 13. Grant program for health insurance cooperatives (Section 310, p. 206) 14. “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321, p. 211) 15. Ombudsman for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321(d), p. 213) 16. Account for receipts and disbursements for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 322(b), p. 215) 17. Telehealth Advisory Committee (Section 1191 (b), p. 589) 18. Demonstration program providing reimbursement for “culturally and linguistically appropriate services” (Section 1222, p. 617) 19. Demonstration program for shared decision making using patient decision aids (Section 1236, p. 648) 20. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicare (Section 1301, p. 653) 21. Independent patient-centered medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302, p. 672) 22. Community-based medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302(d), p. 681) 23. Independence at home demonstration program (Section 1312, p. 718) 24. Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (Section 1401(a), p. 734) 25. Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission (Section 1401(a), p. 738) 26. Patient ombudsman for comparative effectiveness research (Section 1401(a), p. 753) 27. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1412(b)(1), p. 784) 28. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for nursing facilities (Section 1412 (b)(2), p. 786) 29. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1413(a)(3), p. 796) 30. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 1413(b)(3), p. 804) 31. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 1422, p. 859) 32. Demonstration program for approved teaching health centers with respect to Medicare GME (Section 1502(d), p. 933) 33. Pilot program to develop anti-fraud compliance systems for Medicare providers (Section 1635, p. 978) 34. Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange (Section 1647, p. 1000) 35. Medical home pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1722, p. 1058) 36. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1730A, p. 1073) 37. Nursing facility supplemental payment program (Section 1745, p. 1106) 38. Demonstration program for Medicaid coverage to stabilize emergency medical conditions in institutions for mental diseases (Section 1787, p. 1149) 39. Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Section 1802, p. 1162) 40. “Identifiable office or program” within CMS to “provide for improved coordination between Medicare and Medicaid in the case of dual eligibles” (Section 1905, p. 1191) 41. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 1907, p. 1198) 42. Public Health Investment Fund (Section 2002, p. 1214) 43. Scholarships for service in health professional needs areas (Section 2211, p. 1224) 44. Program for training medical residents in community-based settings (Section 2214, p. 1236) 45. Grant program for training in dentistry programs (Section 2215, p. 1240) 46. Public Health Workforce Corps (Section 2231, p. 1253) 47. Public health workforce scholarship program (Section 2231, p. 1254) 48. Public health workforce loan forgiveness program (Section 2231, p. 1258) 49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272) 50. Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment (Section 2261, p. 1275) 51. Prevention and Wellness Trust (Section 2301, p. 1286) 52. Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1295) 53. Community Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1301) 54. Grant program for community prevention and wellness research (Section 2301, p. 1305) 55. Grant program for research and demonstration projects related to wellness incentives (Section 2301, p. 1305) 56. Grant program for community prevention and wellness services (Section 2301, p. 1308) 57. Grant program for public health infrastructure (Section 2301, p. 1313) 58. Center for Quality Improvement (Section 2401, p. 1322) 59. Assistant Secretary for Health Information (Section 2402, p. 1330) 60. Grant program to support the operation of school-based health clinics (Section 2511, p. 1352) 61. Grant program for nurse-managed health centers (Section 2512, p. 1361) 62. Grants for labor-management programs for nursing training (Section 2521, p. 1372) 63. Grant program for interdisciplinary mental and behavioral health training (Section 2522, p. 1382) 64. “No Child Left Unimmunized Against Influenza” demonstration grant program (Section 2524, p. 1391)65. Healthy Teen Initiative grant program regarding teen pregnancy (Section 2526, p. 1398) 66. Grant program for interdisciplinary training, education, and services for individuals with autism (Section 2527(a), p. 1402) 67. University centers for excellence in developmental disabilities education (Section 2527(b), p. 1410) 68. Grant program to implement medication therapy management services (Section 2528, p. 1412) 69. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors in underserved communities (Section 2530, p. 1422) 70. Grant program for State alternative medical liability laws (Section 2531, p. 1431) 71. Grant program to develop infant mortality programs (Section 2532, p. 1433)72. Grant program to prepare secondary school students for careers in health professions (Section 2533, p. 1437) 73. Grant program for community-based collaborative care (Section 2534, p. 1440) 74. Grant program for community-based overweight and obesity prevention (Section 2535, p. 1457) 75. Grant program for reducing the student-to-school nurse ratio in primary and secondary schools (Section 2536, p. 1462) 76. Demonstration project of grants to medical-legal partnerships (Section 2537, p. 1464) 77. Center for Emergency Care under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (Section 2552, p. 1478) 78. Council for Emergency Care (Section 2552, p 1479) 79. Grant program to support demonstration programs that design and implement regionalized emergency care systems (Section 2553, p. 1480) 80. Grant program to assist veterans who wish to become emergency medical technicians upon discharge (Section 2554, p. 1487) 81. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 2562, p. 1494) 82. National Medical Device Registry (Section 2571, p. 1501) 83. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 2581, p. 1597) 84. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 2581, p. 1598) 85. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 2581, p. 1602) 86. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1610) 87. National Women’s Health Information Center (Section 2588, p. 1611) 88. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1614) 89. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health and Gender-Based Research (Section 2588, p. 1617) 90. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1618) 91. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1621) 92. Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 2589(a)(2), p. 1624) 93. Grant program for national health workforce online training (Section 2591, p. 1629) 94. Grant program to disseminate best practices on implementing health workforce investment programs (Section 2591, p. 1632) 95. Demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (Section 3101, p. 1717) 96. Demonstration program for substance abuse counselor educational curricula (Section 3101, p. 1719) 97. Program of Indian community education on mental illness (Section 3101, p. 1722) 98. Intergovernmental Task Force on Indian environmental and nuclear hazards (Section 3101, p. 1754) 99. Office of Indian Men’s Health (Section 3101, p. 1765) 100. Indian Health facilities appropriation advisory board (Section 3101, p. 1774) 101. Indian Health facilities needs assessment workgroup (Section 3101, p. 1775) 102. Indian Health Service tribal facilities joint venture demonstration projects (Section 3101, p. 1809) 103. Urban youth treatment center demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1873) 104. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for diabetes prevention (Section 3101, p. 1874) 105. Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for health IT adoption (Section 3101, p. 1877) 106. Mental health technician training program (Section 3101, p. 1898) 107. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1909) 108. Program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims and perpetrators (Section 3101, p. 1925) 109. Program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (Section 3101, p. 1927) 110. Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1966) 111. Committee for the Establishment of the Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1968)
.
Doctors Rally Against Healthcare Bill, AMA |
||
|
||
| More than 1,000 physicians from all 50 states converged on Washington, D.C., on Thursday in demonstration against controversial healthcare legislation and the American Medical Association, a leading advocate of H.R. 3200, also known as America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. Wearing surgical scrubs, chanting and brandishing signs, the doctors picketed on the front steps of the AMA’s building and delivered a very powerful message. See Video: Doctors rally against healthcare reform – Click Here Now “The AMA has sold out patients and sold out the profession of medicine,” said Kathryn Serkes, policymaker for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), which organized the rally.“In July, they endorsed H.R. 3200 and took a lot of heat and lost members in droves,” said Serkes. “This week, they put out a statement that was an obvious attempt to repair that, but it’s obvious their position hasn’t changed,” she said. “The damage with the medical community cannot be healed.”The doctors then traveled en masse to Capitol Hill for the “Physicians, Stand Together” rally organized by the AAPS in conjunction with “tea party patriots.” The doctors are against legislation that would lead to a government takeover of healthcare, a move they believe would compromise patient quality of care. | ||
Obama’s Speech Prompts Ten Questions from Republicans
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Va., left, and House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio, listen to President Barack Obama’s speech on healthcare to a joint session of Congress, on Wednesday, Sept., 9, 2009, on Capitol Hill. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
The questions – and the words that prompted them – appear here verbatim:
President Barack Obama: “Our collective failure to meet this challenge – year after year, decade after decade – has led us to the breaking point.”
Common Sense Question: If we are at the “breaking point,” then why doesn’t your government-run insurance plan start until 2013?
President Barack Obama: “There are now 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.”
Common Sense Question: On August 20, you said 46 million Americans were uninsured. What happened to 16 million Americans?
President Barack Obama: “And every day, 14,000 Americans lose their coverage.”
Common Sense Question: Does that mean 15 million Americans will lose their health care before your government plan starts in 2013?
President Barack Obama: “We spend one and a half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it.”
Common Sense Question: Then why do people travel from around the world to receive health care in the United States?
President Barack Obama: “Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.”
Common Sense Question: Didn’t the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office say that the health care plan you have endorsed will add $239 billion to our annual deficits over the next ten years?
President Barack Obama: “Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan.”
Common Sense Question: If we can pay for “most” of health care reform by controlling waste and inefficiency, then why does a $900 billion health care plan include $820 billion in tax increases?
President Barack Obama: “…no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion.”
Common Sense Question: Do you object to House Democrats defeating an amendment in the House Energy and Commerce Committee markup that would have explicitly prohibited federal funding of abortion under a government-run health care plan?
President Barack Obama: “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future.”
Common Sense Question: Do you oppose the House Democrat health care plan, H.R. 3200, which the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said will add $239 billion to our annual deficits over the next ten years and “would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits” thereafter? If so, which Democrat plan are you going to support?
President Barack Obama: “Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan…the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over the next 10 years…”
Common Sense Question: If there is so much “waste and inefficiency” in Medicare and Medicaid – two government-run health care plans – then won’t further government involvement in health care lead to further “waste and inefficiency”?
President Barack Obama: “And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen.”
Common Sense Question: Will you agree to meet with House Republican leaders to discuss health care reform, as they requested almost four months ago?
Edit This
Transcript: Obama’s speech to a Joint Session of Congress on health care reform 9-9-09
Posted by: velvethammer
By the way….
Public disapproval of President Barack Obama’s handling of health care has leaped to 52 percent, according to Associated Press-GfK poll that underscores the country’s glowering mood just as the White House revs up its pitch for an overhaul.
Same old song and dance my friends…
This is the prepared text of President Obama’s speech to a Joint Session of Congress on health care reform as provided by the White House.
EMBARGOED UNTIL [sic] 8:00 PM
Remarks of President Barack Obama
Address to a Joint Session of Congress on Health Care
Wednesday, September 9th, 2009
Washington, DC
Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, Members of Congress, and the American people:
When I spoke here last winter, this nation was facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month. Credit was frozen. And our financial system was on the verge of collapse.
As any American who is still looking for work or a way to pay their bills will tell you, we are by no means out of the woods. A full and vibrant recovery is many months away. And I will not let up until those Americans who seek jobs can find them; until those businesses that seek capital and credit can thrive; until all responsible homeowners can stay in their homes. That is our ultimate goal. But thanks to the bold and decisive action we have taken since January, I can stand here with confidence and say that we have pulled this economy back from the brink.
I want to thank the members of this body for your efforts and your support in these last several months, and especially those who have taken the difficult votes that have put us on a path to recovery. I also want to thank the American people for their patience and resolve during this trying time for our nation.
But we did not come here just to clean up crises. We came to build a future. So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future – and that is the issue of health care.
I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last. It has now been nearly a century since Theodore Roosevelt first called for health care reform. And ever since, nearly every President and Congress, whether Democrat or Republican, has attempted to meet this challenge in some way. A bill for comprehensive health reform was first introduced by John Dingell Sr. in 1943. Sixty-five years later, his son continues to introduce that same bill at the beginning of each session.
Our collective failure to meet this challenge – year after year, decade after decade – has led us to a breaking point. Everyone understands the extraordinary hardships that are placed on the uninsured, who live every day just one accident or illness away from bankruptcy. These are not primarily people on welfare. These are middle-class Americans. Some can’t get insurance on the job. Others are self-employed, and can’t afford it, since buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer. Many other Americans who are willing and able to pay are still denied insurance due to previous illnesses or conditions that insurance companies decide are too risky or expensive to cover.
We are the only advanced democracy on Earth – the only wealthy nation – that allows such hardships for millions of its people. There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage. In just a two year period, one in every three Americans goes without health care coverage at some point. And every day, 14,000 Americans lose their coverage. In other words, it can happen to anyone.
But the problem that plagues the health care system is not just a problem of the uninsured. Those who do have insurance have never had less security and stability than they do today. More and more Americans worry that if you move, lose your job, or change your job, you’ll lose your health insurance too. More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won’t pay the full cost of care. It happens every day.
One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn’t reported gallstones that he didn’t even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it. Another woman from Texas was about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer more than doubled in size. That is heart-breaking, it is wrong, and no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.
Then there’s the problem of rising costs. We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages. It’s why so many employers – especially small businesses – are forcing their employees to pay more for insurance, or are dropping their coverage entirely. It’s why so many aspiring entrepreneurs cannot afford to open a business in the first place, and why American businesses that compete internationally – like our automakers – are at a huge disadvantage. And it’s why those of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it – about $1000 per year that pays for somebody else’s emergency room and charitable care.
Finally, our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers. When health care costs grow at the rate they have, it puts greater pressure on programs like Medicare and Medicaid. If we do nothing to slow these skyrocketing costs, we will eventually be spending more on Medicare and Medicaid than every other government program combined. Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.
These are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system. The question is how.
There are those on the left who believe that the only way to fix the system is through a single-payer system like Canada’s, where we would severely restrict the private insurance market and have the government provide coverage for everyone. On the right, there are those who argue that we should end the employer-based system and leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.
I have to say that there are arguments to be made for both approaches. But either one would represent a radical shift that would disrupt the health care most people currently have. Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn’t, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the past several months.
During that time, we have seen Washington at its best and its worst.
We have seen many in this chamber work tirelessly for the better part of this year to offer thoughtful ideas about how to achieve reform. Of the five committees asked to develop bills, four have completed their work, and the Senate Finance Committee announced today that it will move forward next week. That has never happened before. Our overall efforts have been supported by an unprecedented coalition of doctors and nurses; hospitals, seniors’ groups and even drug companies – many of whom opposed reform in the past. And there is agreement in this chamber on about eighty percent of what needs to be done, putting us closer to the goal of reform than we have ever been.
But what we have also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have toward their own government. Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics. Some have dug into unyielding ideological camps that offer no hope of compromise. Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned.
Well the time for bickering is over. (No bickering -demanding you cease and desist) The time for games has passed. (Games? You think we are playing games It is not Monopoly O. How dare you dismiss US citizens with the wag of your tongue. You WORK for US) Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together, and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do. Now is the time to deliver on health care.
The plan I’m announcing tonight would meet three basic goals:
It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don’t. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government. It’s a plan that asks everyone to take responsibility for meeting this challenge – not just government and insurance companies, but employers and individuals. And it’s a plan that incorporates ideas from Senators and Congressmen; from Democrats and Republicans – and yes, from some of my opponents in both the primary and general election.
Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan:
First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.
What this plan will do is to make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse. That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.
That’s what Americans who have health insurance can expect from this plan – more security and stability.
Now, if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage. We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange – a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It’s how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it’s time to give every American the same opportunity that we’ve given ourselves.
For those individuals and small businesses who still cannot afford the lower-priced insurance available in the exchange, we will provide tax credits, the size of which will be based on your need. And all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned. This exchange will take effect in four years, which will give us time to do it right. In the meantime, for those Americans who can’t get insurance today because they have pre-existing medical conditions, we will immediately offer low-cost coverage that will protect you against financial ruin if you become seriously ill. This was a good idea when Senator John McCain proposed it in the campaign, it’s a good idea now, and we should embrace it.
Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those – particularly the young and healthy – who still want to take the risk and go without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their workers. The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits. If some businesses don’t provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an unfair advantage over their competitors. And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek – especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions – just can’t be achieved.
That’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance – just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still cannot afford coverage, and 95% of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.
While there remain some significant details to be ironed out, I believe a broad consensus exists for the aspects of the plan I just outlined: consumer protections for those with insurance, an exchange that allows individuals and small businesses to purchase affordable coverage, and a requirement that people who can afford insurance get insurance.
And I have no doubt that these reforms would greatly benefit Americans from all walks of life, as well as the economy as a whole. Still, given all the misinformation that’s been spread over the past few months, I realize that many Americans have grown nervous about reform. So tonight I’d like to address some of the key controversies that are still out there.
Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.
There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. (LIAR)
“Although the bill states illegal immigrants are not to benefit from the new affordability credits, this prohibition is without an enforcement mechanism. Congress (Dems) voted down an amendment in committee that would have required the use of the SAVE program (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements)”
And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, (LIAR) and federal conscience laws will remain in place.
My health care proposal has also been attacked by some who oppose reform as a “government takeover” of the entire health care system. As proof, critics point to a provision in our plan that allows the uninsured and small businesses to choose a publicly-sponsored insurance option, administered by the government just like Medicaid or Medicare.
So let me set the record straight. My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75% of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90% is controlled by just one company. Without competition, the price of insurance goes up and the quality goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly – by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by jacking up rates.
Insurance executives don’t do this because they are bad people. They do it because it’s profitable. As one former insurance executive testified before Congress, insurance companies are not only encouraged to find reasons to drop the seriously ill; they are rewarded for it. All of this is in service of meeting what this former executive called “Wall Street’s relentless profit expectations.”
Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. The insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.
Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea. They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government. And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won’t be. I have insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects. But by avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits, excessive administrative costs and executive salaries, it could provide a good deal for consumers. It would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better, the same way public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students without in any way inhibiting a vibrant system of private colleges and universities.
It’s worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight. But its impact shouldn’t be exaggerated – by the left, the right, or the media. It is only one part of my plan, and should not be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles. To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it. The public option is only a means to that end – and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal. And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.
For example, some have suggested that that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies. Others propose a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan. These are all constructive ideas worth exploring. But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice. And I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need.
Finally, let me discuss an issue that is a great concern to me, to members of this chamber, and to the public – and that is how we pay for this plan.
Here’s what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. Period. (AP: FACT CHECK: Obama uses iffy math on deficit pledge) And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize. Part of the reason I faced a trillion dollar deficit when I walked in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last decade were not paid for – from the Iraq War to tax breaks for the wealthy. I will not make that same mistake with health care.
Second, we’ve estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system – a system that is currently full of waste and abuse. Right now, too much of the hard-earned savings and tax dollars we spend on health care doesn’t make us healthier. That’s not my judgment – it’s the judgment of medical professionals across this country. And this is also true when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid.
In fact, I want to speak directly to America’s seniors for a moment, because Medicare is another issue that’s been subjected to demagoguery and distortion during the course of this debate.
More than four decades ago, this nation stood up for the principle that after a lifetime of hard work, our seniors should not be left to struggle with a pile of medical bills in their later years. That is how Medicare was born. And it remains a sacred trust that must be passed down from one generation to the next. That is why not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.
The only thing this plan would eliminate is the hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud, as well as unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies – subsidies that do everything to pad their profits and nothing to improve your care. And we will also create an independent commission of doctors and medical experts charged with identifying more waste in the years ahead.
These steps will ensure that you – America’s seniors – get the benefits you’ve been promised. They will ensure that Medicare is there for future generations. And we can use some of the savings to fill the gap in coverage that forces too many seniors to pay thousands of dollars a year out of their own pocket for prescription drugs. That’s what this plan will do for you. So don’t pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut – especially since some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past, and just this year supported a budget that would have essentially turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program. That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare.
Now, because Medicare is such a big part of the health care system, making the program more efficient can help usher in changes in the way we deliver health care that can reduce costs for everybody. We have long known that some places, like the Intermountain Healthcare in Utah or the Geisinger Health System in rural Pennsylvania, offer high-quality care at costs below average. The commission can help encourage the adoption of these common-sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals throughout the system – everything from reducing hospital infection rates to encouraging better coordination between teams of doctors.
Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan. Much of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers. This reform will charge insurance companies a fee for their most expensive policies, which will encourage them to provide greater value for the money – an idea which has the support of Democratic and Republican experts. And according to these same experts, this modest change could help hold down the cost of health care for all of us in the long-run.
Finally, many in this chamber – particularly on the Republican side of the aisle – have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the cost of health care. I don’t believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So I am proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush Administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these issues. It’s a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.
Add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years – less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration. Most of these costs will be paid for with money already being spent – but spent badly – in the existing health care system. The plan will not add to our deficit. The middle-class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term.
This is the plan I’m proposing. It’s a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight – Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.
Obama wants to “seek common ground” now? GOP hasn’t been invited to the White House to discuss health care since the end of April.
But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.
Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true.
That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed – the ones who suffer silently, and the ones who shared their stories with us at town hall meetings, in emails, and in letters.
I received one of those letters a few days ago. It was from our beloved friend and colleague, Ted Kennedy. He had written it back in May, shortly after he was told that his illness was terminal. He asked that it be delivered upon his death.
In it, he spoke about what a happy time his last months were, thanks to the love and support of family and friends, his wife, Vicki, and his children, who are here tonight . And he expressed confidence that this would be the year that health care reform – “that great unfinished business of our society,” he called it – would finally pass. He repeated the truth that health care is decisive for our future prosperity, but he also reminded me that “it concerns more than material things.” “What we face,” he wrote, “is above all a moral issue; at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.”
I’ve thought about that phrase quite a bit in recent days – the character of our country. One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom and our healthy skepticism of government. And figuring out the appropriate size and role of government has always been a source of rigorous and sometimes angry debate.
For some of Ted Kennedy’s critics, his brand of liberalism represented an affront to American liberty. In their mind, his passion for universal health care was nothing more than a passion for big government.
But those of us who knew Teddy and worked with him here – people of both parties – know that what drove him was something more. His friend, Orrin Hatch, knows that. They worked together to provide children with health insurance. His friend John McCain knows that. They worked together on a Patient’s Bill of Rights. His friend Chuck Grassley knows that. They worked together to provide health care to children with disabilities.
On issues like these, Ted Kennedy’s passion was born not of some rigid ideology, but of his own experience. It was the experience of having two children stricken with cancer. He never forgot the sheer terror and helplessness that any parent feels when a child is badly sick; and he was able to imagine what it must be like for those without insurance; what it would be like to have to say to a wife or a child or an aging parent – there is something that could make you better, but I just can’t afford it.
That large-heartedness – that concern and regard for the plight of others – is not a partisan feeling. It is not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character. Our ability to stand in other people’s shoes. A recognition that we are all in this together; that when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand. A belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play; and an acknowledgement that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise.
This has always been the history of our progress. In 1933, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it. In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down. They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind.
You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom. But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, and the vulnerable can be exploited. And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter – that at that point we don’t merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.
What was true then remains true today. I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road – to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.
But that’s not what the moment calls for. That’s not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it’s hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility, and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things, and that here and now we will meet history’s test.
Because that is who we are. That is our calling. That is our character. Thank you, God Bless You, and may God Bless the United States of America.
————————————————————————-
The Public Health Insurance Option: Unfair Competition on a Tilting Field
It’s Still Government-Run Health Care If …
President misleads Americans in health care speech
Stunner… AP Pummels Liar In Chief’s Dishonest Speech
Previously:
Transcript: Obama’s Speech AFL-CIO Labor Day Picnic 9-7-09
Transcript: Obama Health Care Town Hall Bozeman Montana 8-14-09
Caught on Tape: Catching a Ride on the ObamaCare AstrOturf Bus!
Obama NH Town Hall: Little Girl Asking About “Mean Signs” A Plant
Obama Town Hall Portsmouth New Hampshire 8-11-09 [Full Transcript]
[Video] Mark Levin on Obamacare Town Hall Rallies: If Something Happens to Protester White House Is Responsible
Obama Smack Talk: “I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking”
Video: Robert Gibbs Fishy Response to White House Request for Fishy Emails
Full Screenshot: Obama Administration Fishy Request For Government Informants
HCAN Playbook For Thwarting Town Hall Protesters [Full Text]
White House In a Snit About Health Care Opposition – Asking For Government Snitches
Obama is as Transparent as Glass
[Explosive Video] Obama:”I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately” 3-24-07
Looking at the ObamaCare Gift in the Mouth: Top Five Democrat Health Care Lies
Transcript: Obama Health Care Townhall Raleigh N.C. Broughton High July 29 2009
Tweeting ObamaCare [Updated & Bumped]
Full Transcript: Obama Prime Time Press Conference ‘Health Care’ July 23 2009
ObamaCare Roundup!
Full Transcript & Video: Obama’s Staged Healthcare Town Hall Meeting Annandale, Va. July 1 2009
Transcript: Obama’s “Prescription for America” June 24 2009
Full Transcript: Obama Health Care Town Hall Green Bay Southwest High School June 11 2009
Edit This
De-bunking Obama’s healthcare speech
Karl Rove: Obama Speech ‘Bitter and Partisan’ |
||
|
||
| Former presidential adviser Karl Rove said President Barack Obama’s address to Congress Wednesday night was “gratuitously bitter and partisan,” and that Obama’s biggest problem with his proposed plan for healthcare reform was its glaring misstatements and distortions.Calling it “not an exceptionally good speech,” Rove told Fox News Wednesday there were several things within Obama’s plan that Republican opponents can pick from.“He’s not shooting straight with us,” Rove said about the section of Obama’s speech in which he talked about the “so-called lies and statements” about his proposal.“Obama said people are concerned with setting up death panels to kill off senior citizens, but that’s not what they’re concerned about,” Rove told Fox News. “They’re concerned about the proposal that basically says we’re going to incentivize doctors to sit down with [a patient] and go over end-of-life decisions.”Obama said it was a myth that his plan would insure illegal aliens, Rove noted. “That’s absolutely false. Obama keeps talking about 46 million uninsured Americans who don’t have health insurance. The U.S. Census Dept. says 9.7 million of those are illegal aliens.”Rove refuted Obama’s contention that there will be no government takeover of the healthcare business by saying that if you want to get more competition, the way to get it is not by setting up a new government entity which runs an exchange.“You simply get rid of the requirements that keep companies from selling insurance in every state. We ought to be able to buy health insurance across state lines like we buy auto insurance.”Rove doesn’t believe the president when he promises the American people that no one will force anyone to give up their coverage. “The fact of the matter is the proposal –– which was designed in the House of Representatives –– says if you’re a business you can either continue to provide health care to your employees or you can pay a fine equal to 8.5 percent of your payroll costs. Those companies now are paying for healthcare coverage in excess of 8.5 percent. So, they pay the fine, dump the coverage, and you’re in the government program.”Rove disagrees with Obama when he says his plan will not add to the deficit, but notes the Congressional Budget Office has determined it will add to the deficit in the first 10 years.“In [the president’s] proposal, you have 10 years of tax increases and benefit cuts in Medicare to fund eight years or less of the program,” Rove explained. “So, by the eighth or ninth year, you’ve run through the surplus you built up in the first two years, where all you are doing is collecting money and not spending it. Then there’s a deficit by the tenth year.”Rove disagrees with Obama having said no new plan would force cuts in the Medicare program and points to the president’s own White House Web site that says there will be $622 billion in Medicare cuts.“If it’s so easy to cut, cut it now!” he implored.In addressing tort reform, Rove said Obama is merely tossing Republicans a fig leaf that he finds, “frankly, disappointing.” He noted that the Bush administration, for which he served as White House deputy chief of staff, was in favor of comprehensive medical liability reform and the Democrats blocked it.“As a backup, we said: ‘Let us try some little demonstration projects to show how this works,’ and the Democrats blocked that in Congress.” Rove said Obama should have embraced the medical liability reform law that would save, according to federal budgeters, $38 billion of taxpayer dollars every year through defensive medicine.“We would save a big chunk of that through medical liability reform and he didn’t endorse it.” © 2009 Newsmax. | ||
GOP Complains Obama Still Stuck on Bad Plan |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s Republican adversaries remain ready to rumble in the aftermath of his impassioned push to reform America’s health care system. There were the requisite calls for bipartisanship _ public opinion polls show that voters by overwhelming margins want Republicans and Democrats to work in tandem. “House Republicans … are ready, willing, and able to work with the Democrat majority to solve our health care challenges in a bipartisan manner,” Rep. Mike Pence said in a news release. But above the remark blared the headline: “One More Speech about the Same Bad Plan.” Both Obama and the Republican chosen to give his party’s televised response to the speech noted that there is room for agreement on elements of a plan. “We can do better, with a targeted approach that tackles the biggest problems,” said Louisiana Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., a former heart surgeon. Such areas of agreement include helping small businesses and the self-employed join together to get better deals on health insurance, Boustany said. Republicans were also heartened by Obama’s promise to take steps to limit medical malpractice lawsuits, which they say force doctors to practice defensive medicine and order up unnecessary tests. On its face, the GOP message of the day was to slow down and start over. But in also issuing warnings against a government “takeover” of health care or “massive cuts” to Medicare, Republicans also made it clear that the gut-punching will soon resume. “With his agenda on life support, it’s not surprising that President Obama is still pushing for a government takeover of our health care system,” said former GOP Rep. Chris Chocola, president of the Club For Growth, a fundraising group that supports conservative Republicans. “But no matter how many times he repackages it, the American people aren’t buying what the president is selling.” Republicans also noted that they haven’t been invited to the White House since April and that Obama rebuffed a request by GOP leaders in May for a face-to-face meeting on health care. “I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it,” Obama said. Not a single Republican has endorsed any of the plans approved so far by four House and Senate committees. Despite being badly outnumbered in Congress, Republicans have been riding a political wave as voters increasingly have turned against Democrats’ efforts to provide more coverage to the uninsured and to pay for it through a tax surcharge on the wealthy. Forty-nine percent say they oppose the health overhaul plans being considered by Congress, compared with just 34 percent who favor them, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll released Wednesday. Fully 79 percent of respondents said it is important for any health care plan to have support from both Democrats and Republicans. Some Republicans said Obama squandered the chance to build bipartisan support by continuing to favor a government-run plan for the uninsured. “I sat there tonight wondering what the purpose of this evening was,” said Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn. “I was hoping to hear the president flesh out a middle ground, but instead we heard platitudes and campaign rhetoric.” © 2009 Associated Press.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Obama Credits McCain on Health Coverage Plan |
||
|
||
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is including a proposal from his Republican rival last year as part of his health care reform plan. In his Wednesday night speech to Congress, Obama said he wants to help Americans who can’t get insurance because they have pre-existing medical conditions. He said the government should offer them low-cost coverage to protect them against financial ruin if they become seriously ill. Obama said it was a “good idea” when Sen. John McCain proposed it during the presidential campaign. He adds that it’s still a good idea, and “we should embrace it.” Amid applause from his colleagues, McCain smiled and gave Obama a thumbs-up. © 2009 Associated Press.
HOMH’s Dr. Goldberg Responds to President’s Health Care Speech“The President’ speech last night was a cynical recycling of a previous theme: health care spending unchecked has enriched a few by denying coverage to many and by delivering care that is both wasteful and fraudulent. Only the steady and spreading hand of government can save us from ourselves…. However, in the same breath, he ridiculed and attacked those who have legitimate concerns about the cost of his plan. He dug his heels in on the untested claim that he can pay for increasing health care spending by letting a panel of experts decide what care is wasteful. The assertion that access to care or the doctor-patient relationship would remain untouched by such intrusion is belied by existing practices in Medicare, Medicaid and government run programs around the world. He spent most of time engaging in ideological bullying of those who disagree. Indeed, he claimed those who disagree with his approach or oppose his plans are, in his view, breaking faith with the American way of life. As a result, the President and his plan are in deeper trouble than before he spoke. The battle lines are drawn between increased government control over health care and any other idea that stands in the way of that objective.” - Dr. Robert Goldberg |
||
Federal tax incentives have created a world in which the vast majority of people get health insurance through their employers. Then to really screw ordinary Americans, the tax code actually punishes people who don’t get their health insurance through an employer by denying individuals the tax deduction for health insurance that their employers get.
Meanwhile, state governments must approve the insurers allowed to operate in their states, while mandating a list of services — i.e. every “medical” service with a powerful lobby — which is why Joe and Ruth Zelinsky, both 88, of Paterson, N.J., are both covered in case either one of them ever needs a boob job.
If Democrats really wanted people to be able to purchase health insurance when they move or lose a job as easily as they purchase car insurance and home insurance (or haircuts, dog walkers, cars, food, computers), they could do it in a one-page bill lifting the government controls and allowing interstate commerce in health insurance. This is known as “allowing the free market to operate.”
Plus, think of all the paper a one-page bill would save! Don’t Democrats care about saving the planet anymore? Go green!
(13) The “public option” trigger is something other than a national takeover of health care.
Why does the government get to decide when the “trigger” has been met, allowing it to do something terrible to us? Either the government is better at providing goods and services or the free market is — and I believe the historical record is clear on that. Why do liberals get to avoid having that argument simply by invoking “triggers”?
Why not have a “trigger” allowing people to buy medical insurance on the free market when a trigger is met, such as consumers deciding their health insurance is too expensive? Or how about a trigger allowing us to buy health insurance from Utah-based insurers — but only when triggered by our own states requiring all insurance companies to cover marriage counseling, drug rehab and shrinks?
Thinking more broadly, how about triggers for paying taxes? Under my “public option” plan, citizens would not have to pay taxes until a trigger kicks in. For example, 95 percent of the Department of Education’s output is useful, or — in the spirit of compromise — at least not actively pernicious.
Also, I think we need triggers for taking over our neighbors’ houses. If they don’t keep up 95 percent of their lawn — on the basis of our lawn commission’s calculations — we get to move in. As with Obama’s public option trigger, we (in the role of “government”) pay nothing. All expenses with the house would continue to be paid by the neighbor (playing “taxpayer”).
To make our housing “public option” even more analogous to Obama’s health care “public option,” we’ll have surly government employees bossing around the neighbors after we evict them and a Web site for people to report any negative comments the neighbors make about us.
Another great trigger idea: We get to pull Keith Olbermann’s hair to see if it’s a toupee — but only when triggered by his laughably claiming to have gone to an Ivy League university, rather than the bovine management school he actually attended.
(14) National health care will not cover abortions or illegal immigrants.
This appeared in an earlier installment of “Liberal Lies About Health Care,” but I keep seeing Democrats like Howard Dean and Rep. Jan Schakowsky on TV angrily shouting that these are despicable lies — which, in itself, constitutes proof that it’s all true.
Then why did Democrats vote down amendments that would prohibit coverage for illegals and abortion? (Also, why is Planned Parenthood collecting petition signatures in Manhattan — where they think they have no reason to be sneaky — in support of national health care?)
On July 30 of this year, a House committee voted against a Republican amendment offered by Rep. Nathan Deal that would have required health care providers to use the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) Program to prevent illegal aliens from receiving government health care services. All Republicans and five Democrats voted for it, but 29 Democrats voted against it, killing the amendment.
On the same day, the committee voted 30-29 against an amendment offered by Republican Joe Pitts explicitly stating that government health care would not cover abortions. Zealous abortion supporter Henry Waxman — a walking, breathing argument for abortion if ever there was one — originally voted in favor of the Pitts amendment because that allowed him, in a sleazy parliamentary trick, to bring the amendment up for reconsideration later. Which he did — as soon as he had enough Democrats in the hearing room to safely reject it.
If any liberal sincerely believes that national health care will not cover illegals and abortion, how do they explain the Democrats frantically opposing amendments that would make this explicit?
This is obviously a matter of great importance to all Americans, because, with Obama’s economic policies, none of us may have jobs by year’s end.
The only reason you can’t keep — or often obtain — health insurance if you move or lose your job now is because of … government intrusion into the free market.
Edit This
Obama Has Bigger Issues to Discuss Than Healthcare |
||
|
||
| It’s easy to attack a leader. And yet President Barack Obama says he wants input from Republicans. When I was politically active, including nationally, I was heavily involved on the GOP side of things. So here’s a constructive memorandum to the president. It’s based on both experience and on some of the nonpartisan polls our firm conducts.It’s intended to explore the reasons Obama’s approval ratings are dipping and what he can do to prevent a disastrous four years in office. I know he won’t read it, but I’m writing it as if he will — that is, as fairly and professionally as I can.Americans are scared stiff about a host of issues, including job security, credit availability, home values, international threats, even the swine flu . . . you name it.Mr. President, some liked your stimulus bill, and some didn’t. Either way, that legislation, along with the balky “cash-for-clunkers” initiative, are the only “big ideas” your administration has put forward to counter a faltering economy. And with a couple of exceptions, there is little evidence of “stimulus” reaching the public. Americans are losing faith that your administration has a fiscally sound approach to keep the recession from getting deeper or longer.You were elected by independent voters who rightfully felt the Bush administration had overspent and underperformed. They were tired of edicts from on high, bailouts crafted by cozy financial titans and an obsession over a foreign war while circumstances at home were deteriorating.And yet with your obsession over healthcare reform, you and your administration are more and more looking at least as out of touch with voters as the Bush team was. We’re still suffering severe economic doldrums, yet you’ve soldiered on with a speech about healthcare to a joint session of Congress. That issue is near the bottom of the list of things most Americans are now fretting about. It’s hard to get excited about the expansion of government when most people don’t think that government does a satisfactory job of the many tasks it already handles.Also, consider that many independent and libertarian voters developed during the George W. Bush years a sense that Sept. 11 was a pretext for government to expand its reach into the lives of citizens, and without proper representation of voters through their elected House and Senate members.But if that gave some people heartburn, the actions of your administration in less than a year have struck a chord of fear — not just with conservative Republicans, but increasingly with moderates, many of whom voted for you. For one thing, there are too many “czars” and bureaucrats. Many of them hold reigns of power granted them by executive branch fiat, and not by congressional approval.Finally, there’s a growing sense that the Chinese official who recently criticized American monetary policy may be right. In essence, he said the U.S. is printing so much money that it may one day be nearly worthless. Talk of the national debt used to mean little to the average voter. But now that most Americans are being forced to deal with their own private debt, they are far more sensitive to the issue. When they hear words like “trillions of dollars” being thrown around, it strikes home.If I could suggest one overall theme you might adopt to bring comfort to uneasy Americans, Mr. President, it would be a renewed faith in and reliance on free enterprise. Right now, you’re largely seen as a leader who thinks government is the solution to whatever ails us. That’s why the word “socialism” is heard more and more, and not just among conservatives. It’s also why many didn’t trust you to address America’s schoolchildren and why you had to alter the speech’s language to avoid the appearance that you were trying to recruit school kids as social activists.Months ago, I wrote that economic recovery would come sooner than most expect. A look at early September’s stock market backs up that claim. But with credit too tight, consumers unwilling and unable to spend, a looming final implosion in commercial real estate, and an international community that now sees our government spending and debt as a threat to the global economy, I have to say my optimism is gone.Mr. President, your speech to Congress should have been about issues other than healthcare. You now have little time to retool your perspective and agenda. The issues I’ve listed above are a serious threat to the success of your presidency and the future of our nation.Matt Towery is author of the new book, “Paranoid Nation: The Real Story of the 2009 Fight for the Presidency.” He heads the polling and political information firm InsiderAdvantage. | ||
FACT CHECK: Obama Drops Iffy Line on Health Plan
In his speech to Congress President Barack Obama gave a more accurate — and less reassuring — account of the impact of his proposed health care overall than he has done in the past
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
WASHINGTON — The change was subtle, but significant.
In his speech to Congress on Wednesday night, President Barack Obama gave a more accurate — and less reassuring — account of the impact of his proposed health care overall than he has done in the past.
It went by in a blink.
He told Americans that nothing he is proposing will force businesses or consumers to change their existing insurance coverage. That much is true.
It’s also true that nothing in his plan guarantees that policies people have now will continue to be available in the same form. In earlier accounts, he spoke with unmerited certainty in saying people who are happy with their current insurance can simply keep it.
Other parts of his speech repeated some of the oversimplified claims that have marked his salesmanship. A look at some of his assertions Wednesday night:
OBAMA: “Nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: Nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.”
THE FACTS: That’s correct, as far as it goes. But neither can the plan guarantee that people can keep their current coverage. Employers sponsor coverage for most families, and they’d be free to change their health plans in ways that workers may not like, or drop insurance altogether. The Congressional Budget Office analyzed the health care bill written by House Democrats and said that by 2016 some 3 million people who now have employer-based care would lose it because their employers would decide to stop offering it.
In the past Obama repeatedly said, “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.” Now he’s stopping short of that unconditional guarantee by saying nothing in the plan “requires” any change.
He’s dropped the “period.”
——
OBAMA: “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period.”
THE FACTS: Despite this “period,” the White House and congressional Democrats have already shown they’re ready to skirt the no-new-deficits pledge.
House Democrats offered a bill that the Congressional Budget Office said would add $220 billion to the deficit over 10 years. But Democrats and Obama administration officials claimed the bill was actually deficit-neutral. They said they simply didn’t have to count $245 billion of it — the cost of adjusting Medicare reimbursement rates so physicians don’t face big annual pay cuts.
Their only-in-Washington reasoning was that they already decided to exempt this so-called “doc fix” from congressional rules that require new programs to be paid for. In other words, it doesn’t have to be paid for because they decided it doesn’t have to be paid for.
The administration also said that since Obama already included the doctor payment in his 10-year budget proposal, it didn’t have to be counted again.
Even aside from that, the long-term prognosis for the costs of the health care legislation has not been good.
Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf had this to say in July about evolving health care legislation: “We do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.”
——
OBAMA: Requiring insurance companies to cover preventive care like mammograms and colonoscopies “makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.”
The facts: Studies have shown that much preventive care — particularly tests like the ones Obama mentions — actually costs money instead of saving it. That’s because detecting acute diseases like breast cancer in their early stages involves testing many people who would never end up developing the disease. The costs of a large number of tests, even if they’re relatively cheap, will outweigh the costs of caring for the minority of people who would have ended up getting sick without the testing.
The Congressional Budget Office wrote in August: “The evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, not lower, medical spending overall.”
That doesn’t mean preventive care doesn’t make sense or save lives. It just doesn’t save money.
——
OBAMA: “If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage.”
THE FACTS: It’s not just a matter of being able to get coverage. Most people would have to get coverage under the law, if his plan is adopted.
In his speech, Obama endorsed mandatory coverage for individuals, an approach he did not embrace as a candidate.
He proposed during the campaign — as he does now — that larger businesses be required to offer insurance to workers or else pay into a fund. But he rejected the idea of requiring individuals to obtain insurance. He said people would get insurance without being forced to do so by the law, if coverage were made affordable. And he repeatedly criticized his Democratic primary rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, for proposing to mandate coverage.
“To force people to get health insurance, you’ve got to have a very harsh penalty,” he said in a February 2008 debate.
Now, he says, “individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.”
He proposes a hardship waiver, exempting from the requirement those who cannot afford coverage despite increased federal aid.
Doctors Boo Obama During Healthcare Speech |
||||||
|
||||||
| Barack Obama isn’t used to hearing boos. For all the young president’s popularity, the response he got Monday from doctors at an American Medical Association meeting was a sign his road is only going to get rockier as he tries to sell his plan to overhaul the nation’s health care system. The boos erupted when Obama told the doctors in Chicago he wouldn’t try to help them win their top legislative priority — limits on jury damages in medical malpractice cases. But what could they expect? If Obama announced support for malpractice limits, that would set trial lawyers and unions — major supporters of Democratic candidates — on the attack. Not to mention consumer groups. Every other group in the health care debate has a wish list and a top priority. Insurers don’t want competition from the government. Employers don’t want to be told they have to offer medical coverage to their workers. Hospitals want to stave off Medicare cuts. Drug companies want to charge what the market will bear.Obama can’t give all of them what they want. Instead, he’s got to figure what’s just enough to keep as many groups as possible on board — without alienating others. It’s a fine line for him — and sometimes for them.”It’s a coalition issue,” said Robert Blendon of the Harvard School of Public Health, an expert on public opinion and the politics of health care. “No major group is able by itself to sink health reform. But if numbers of them come together for different reasons, it could really hurt the direction the president wants to go in.”The doctors were only Obama’s first house call. He’ll be making his case to the other groups — and to the nation at large — in an increasingly energetic campaign to get a bill passed by the end of his first year in office.AMA insiders shouldn’t have been surprised by Obama’s upfront refusal to consider malpractice caps.The group couldn’t get that idea passed by a Republican Congress and president a few years ago. Some states have such curbs, but anyone who can count votes knows the chances for national limits are slim to none with Democrats in charge of Congress.Instead, Obama left the door open to some kind of compromise on malpractice.The president said he’s willing to explore alternatives to taking doctors to court. In the past, he supported special programs in which hospitals and doctors are encouraged to admit mistakes, correct them and offer compensation. Studies have shown the approach can work, because doctors’ refusal to acknowledge mistakes is one reason many families file suit.Doctors have special reasons to be wary of the president’s plans to overhaul the health care system.
Not long ago, doctors’ decisions were rarely questioned. Now they are being blamed for a big part of the wasteful spending in the nation’s $2.5 trillion health care system. Studies have shown that as much as 30 cents of the U.S. health care dollar may be going for tests and procedures that are of little or no value to patients. The Obama administration has cited such findings as evidence that the system is broken. Since doctors are the ones responsible for ordering tests and procedures, health care costs cannot be brought under control unless they change their decision-making habits. “Change is scary,” said Dartmouth University’s Dr. Elliott Fisher, a doctor turned costs researcher. “I think there is a fear of loss of autonomy, that someone is going to tell you what to do.” Fisher collaborated on research that showed wild differences in health care spending around the country — and no signs of better health in the high-cost areas. But Obama did not blame the doctors. Instead, he tried to woo them, much as he has done with recalcitrant foreign leaders. “It’s the equivalent of international diplomacy. He’s got to make them feel like it’s possible to have dialogue about what the future looks like,” said Blendon. “I think he’s starting out with the AMA, but before the summer’s over he’s going to reach out to a lot of the other groups.” Obama assured the doctors that his plan would provide them with objective information on what treatments work best, with new computerized tools to better manage their patient case loads, and with support for harried solo practitioners to form networks. He promised that Washington would not dictate clinical decisions. And he asked the doctors to imagine a world in which nearly every patient has insurance coverage and they can devote their full attention to the practice of medicine. “You did not enter this profession to be bean-counters and paper-pushers,” Obama said. “You entered this profession to be healers — and that’s what our health care system should let you be.” That line got him an ovation. © 2009 Associated Press.
|
||||||
