Have you read the Health Care Bill?
Residential Real Estate Broker · Conroe, TX · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 43 votes
How many of you have read a good portion of the health care bill?
I must admit, I coudn't sit and crack out 1000 or so pages of legal jargon at one sitting but, I did find a site with some bullet points, then I located a download of the bill. From there I've been chipping away at it. Anyway, I wanted to ask views from those who have read a good portion of the bill. Personally, I see this as a huge mistake.
http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
I agree. I believe it will not only destroy our current health care system, but create an additional entitlement that will bankrupt our country. There are legitimate concerns and problems with our health care system and the insurance companies that have the greatest influence over it, but the Democrats are more concerned with controlling health care and creating an addtional entitlement to the tune of a trillion plus dollars, than addressing those problems. The biggest issue with business owners and policy holders is cost (I know, I have been a benefits consultant for 22 years). How does increasing the overall cost by a trillion + address that problem? How does raising taxes to pay for it address that problem? As one example, why don't the Democrats address the need for tort reform, eliminating defensive medicine, and the escalating malpractice insurance costs which drive some specialists out of practice, all a huge drain on the cost of health care (maybe because they won't go up against the trial lawyers who benefit). I could go on and on, but what the Democrats are proposing won't fix the problems, just create new ones.
Here's the Bill:
http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
Here's the Bullet Format:
48 Important Things to Know about Obama’s Healthcare Plan – no matter what your politics might be, you had better read them very carefully! This is the TRUTH about ObamaCare!
Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner†will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None!
Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Health card.
Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and AmeriCorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No “judicial review†is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
Page 203: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.†Yes, it really says that.
Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected.â€
Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you’ll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
Page 253: Government sets value of doctors’ time, their professional judgment, etc.
Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on “community†input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing
Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
Page 379: More bureaucracy: Tele-health Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.
Now, Dick, how could you believe a "nasty and misleading right-wing chain email" funded by the insurance industry? This site provides you with a reply email to "fight these smears, one lie at a time."
http://healthcareforamericanow.org/site/content/fight_the_smears
It's funny, their truths on each point didn't ease my mind one bit.
I have never in my life seen such corrupt, machine politics in this country. I hope people continue to speak out against this bill. I know I will.
Debbie
I have seen these lists of provisions and others regarding tentative bills, and to me the provisioins are just a big smoke screen; bargaining chips to ultimately get the final bill passed. Don't like the "death panel", OK, we'll take it out. Don't want ACORN receiving funds, fine, they're out. After much compromising and deletions to the bills, a bi-partisan agreement will be reached with much made of how the Democrats reached out to the Republicans so health care could be reformed for the good of the Nation. The most important aspects to the Democrats, Gov't controll and the creation of a new entitlement, in some version will exist in the final legislation. And when all is said and done, that is what they are really after.
The site in question looks like a spin attempt to me. And a poor one at that. Why go to a .org site instead of .gov?
It's funny in a way. Reading their info....they're saying, "Yea we're busted....Most of the claims against the plan are true.
So What! What can you or are you gonna do about it?"....lol
I even question the reason for the style in which the article is written. Starting each refute with TRUTH: Why not the normal True/False format? "What is truth?" Said Pilate...lol.......
Look for instance item on page 95. Where it talks about the commission conducting outreach.
We are already seeing what happens to desenting opinions. Who will be involved in this massive outreach plan aimed at the so called vunerable? No one is going to speak up for them as they are assimulated into the iron and clay mixture. What group of people will be next?
Look at item #253. Government setting wages for Doctors participating with this plan is a given. No need to refute it.
This bill is intentionally written in such a obscure way as to mis-lead the american public. One must be willing to cross-reference for ever and a day to fully understand it. Why is this so, when we are living in the greatest information age ever? Everything is written in reference to something other than what the reader is currently reading.
We live in an age where knowledge abounds. The bill relies on tons of references. Why not hyperlink them in the text?
But looking at some the points refuted or clarified:
How about item #293. Would a payment reduction be considered a good thing or a penalty?
Or item #335...I don't like the idea of giving up the right to having the final say in what works and what doesn't work for me and my house.
Overall, I see something much bigger. I see government wanting to control all aspects of flesh. We should all be aware of what's really at stake.
Check out This Article in the New York Post. Make your own decision whether or not you want these types of individuals in charge
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07242009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/deadly_doctors_180941.htm?&page=0
I've read about 50% of it now, so my opinion isn't based on the crap that everyone (on both sides) is spewing...
My (mostly informed) opinion:
The bill is crap. But it's no worse than the system we have today.
Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected.â€
Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
Excerpt From:
Downgrading American Medical Care
June 9th, 2009
By Betsy McCaughey
"Also slipped into the emergency stimulus legislation was substantial funding for a Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. Studying which medication or device works best is obviously a good thing, but comparative effectiveness research is generally code for limiting care based on the patient's age.
Economists are familiar with the formula already in use in the U.K., where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYS or quality-adjusted life years) the patient is likely to benefit. In the U.K., the formula leads to denying treatments for age-related diseases because older patients have a denominator problem -- fewer years to benefit than younger patients with other diseases."
Read More....
http://www.defendyourhealthcare.us/lesscareamspectator.html
The health care bill isn't about better health care or trimming cost. It's about a loss of american freedom, identifying non-conformers, mixing iron and clay and positioning america to lead the nations in a move towards globalism.
Pinky asks, "What are we gonna do today Brain?"
Brain, "Same thing we do everyday, We want to provide healthcare to the world!".
My overall concern in regard to this issue is the loss of freedom that no one seems to notice. Personally, I think that it's only 1/6 of a piece to a much larger puzzle. The real problem is the spirit behind this system. We should have been warned.
I originally voted for Obama, but he gets no free pass from me. I simply disagree with what he's allowing the puppetmasters to do to America, and wish I wouldn't have fell for the whole Brotherman OKeeeDoke!
I kick myself when I think back and remember how the philosophy behind one of his confidents stunk to the high heaven. Even to the point of damning America. I must have been asleep. Damning this great country which we are blessed to live in. With the undisputed best existing health care system bar none.
Read the bills! Start Today! Consider the conversation of those who are aware of the stakes!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmmiwHw8bNg
"US President Barack Obama on Friday blamed headline-hungry television networks for enflaming an ugly backlash by foes of his top priority effort to offer health care to all Americans."
"A combative Obama also accused health insurance firms of holding sick Americans "hostage" as he launched a weekend tour of mountain west states Montana, Colorado and Arizona where suspicion of Washington runs deep."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.228e42c5948115405d6f3ec5d1ad6b50.1a1&show_article=1
It's OK to disagree yet this ochlocratic system is fashioned after his mentor Chavez. And as for the insurance companies bleeding the public dry....they are free to do so. What we don't want is clay and iron making a league with death. Also, everyone knows that the media is slanted to Obama.
Excerpts from:DEADLY DOCTORS
ADVISORS WANT TO RATION CARE
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
"THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the decisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They'd decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.
Yet at least two of President Obama's top health advisers should never be trusted with that power."
"Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research."
"Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free...."
"Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, "as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others" (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008)."
"Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96)."
Chat more soon....gotta go to work
Dick -
I don't disagree that this bill is pretty horrible (I've said it many times)...but the bigger question remains of whether we should be reforming health care in the first place.
After reading about 50% of the bill, if I were in a position to do so, I would vote against this bill without a second thought.
But, that doesn't address the question of whether health care in this country is really any good or not.
Your comment that "...as for the insurance companies bleeding the public dry....they are free to do so," indicates that you don't seem to mind that insurance companies are taking advantage of us.
How would you feel if your house were on fire and 50% of the time the fire department didn't show up? You'd probably demand that something changed.
What if when you called 911, 50% of the time there was no answer? You'd probably demand that something changed.
Well, we have evidence that 50% of the time someone is in dire need of health coverage for a severe illness, the private health insurance companies will drop you:
http://tauntermedia.com/2009/07/28/unconscionable-math/
That's unconscionable!
I hope that you, me, or any of our loved ones never get so sick that our insurance company decides to flip a coin to figure out which 50% we're in, but just in case, we need to do something about it.
Agreed that this bill sucks, and agreed with everyone who believes Obama is doing a horrible job putting together legislation that will allow this country continued success, but that we need to separate this specific piece of legislation from the bigger picture of health care in America.
I didn't mean to sound insensitive, I was trying to make an impact about the value of keeping our freedoms in a business sector that deals with our very existence. I can choose my insurance policy. I can choose my health plan. I can choose to live in an area where 911 services are bad. It's the choosing that's important.
This most important sector of our private economy (representing 1/6), is best left in the hands of the people (clay) (flawed as they may be), than government. (iron)
The whole thrust of this initiative is to create a one pay/single system. It's a move to simplify integration of America into a global system. It has nothing to do with innovation, profit, care, compassion, forethought, the deficit or any other sane components.. Trust...it's built on trust and change regardless of what you actually read....lol
How can this new olchlocratic system of government best move it's loyal ocher servants in the direction of globalism. Mooooo! Moooove along.....don't think.....trust me, I'm gonna solve all your problems....here' have a new car...on me....lol.
I've never heard the word "Mob," used in reference to the majority of Americans in all my 54 years. Clay and the iron will never mix well.
The majority will always tend to disagree. They just won't be able to do much of anything.
The American public is being vambossled. This current administration has positioned itself on the general populace In such a fashion that disagreeing with it has little effect.
During the same time freedom of speech is being tested. Who's every heard of the government asking it's loyal followers to turn in the names of individuals who may have dissenting views?
The whole picture is worse to consider. The next administration that comes into power will probably be infatuated with the expansion of bureaucracy especially the executive branch. It will never be dismantled. This usurpation human rights within this great country who holds the largest deposit of indiviual rights will be it's bete noire.
You know whats going to happen, in it's quest for globalism, who ever we vote in during the next election, will simply pick up where this current one leaves off. For all practible purposes it will have proven that the ochlocatic form of government which, doesn't care what public opinion is, can function as a system of government in the U.S. New people same system. Then the next logical question it asks itself....Why do we need new people?
Obama is just a case of , "Let the new guy do all the dirty work politics."
I believe in free enterprise. I just don't see good change defined as turning my rights over to the government. Especially, so many, so quickly without considering the coinsequences.
Come on....what's the real rush?
Dick -
Your entire theory presupposes that the plurality of the people in this country don't want what the government is trying to hand us.
If that's truly the case, then I agree with you 100%. The government should not try to force down our throats what the plurality of the constituency doesn't want.
But, what if what the government is trying to hand us IS what the plurality of the constituency wants? What if the government is truly handing people what they are asking for?
Unfortunately, it's tough to determine whether that's the case or not...
The democrats are trying to pass legislation without spending any significant time making sure it's worthwhile. And the republicans are fabricating rumors about the legislation to scare the public into opposing it.
So, who knows whether the public wants healthcare reform or not. And if they do, who knows if they would be happy with a single-payer system or not (though they seem happy with the existing single-payer health systems we currently have in place)?
I'm a big believer in "the average American is an idiot," but even more so than that, I'm a big believer in "give the public what they want."
I think it's important that we get a grip on the pulse of the populace and cater to it as best possible. That's what this country was founded upon, and if we are really going to get back to the core of what our founding fathers believed, that's what we need to do.
I haven't met everyone in the U.S. According to some of the stuff I've read, it isn't a slam dunk deal. The majority of Americans are not for Obama's socialized health care.
If they are, someone hasn't told the President. Here's an article taken from The Chicago Tribune. You'd think they would be rather bias.
Excerpt:
"GRAND JUNCTION, Colo. (AP) — President Barack Obama is using political tactics and rhetorical devices honed in his White House campaign to regain the upper hand in the health care debate over increasingly vocal critics."
http://tiny.cc/IJQDg
Here's an article showing that 54% say NO to the current health care bills. It's written backwards and obscure but it means the majority don't want it.
"Thirty-five percent (35%) of American voters say passage of the bill currently working its way through Congress would be better than not passing any health care reform legislation this year. However, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that most voters (54%) say no health care reform passed by Congress this year would be the better option."
In another article we see that we Don't currently have a single pay system:
"Thirty-two percent (32%) of voters nationwide favor a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% are opposed to a single-payer plan.
Fifty-two percent (52%) believe such a system would lead to a lower quality of care while 13% believe care would improve. Twenty-seven percent (27%) think that the quality of care would remain about the same."
http://tiny.cc/3KzxO
You ain't seen single-payer healthcare yet till you see the world government as the payer.
Here's an excerpt from: Matt Johnson
Health care is a right; Obama plan courageous, single-payer an ultimate goal by Matt Johnson (Pro-healthcare)
"People, as a group, largely think “socialism†is a horrible thing, so the opponents of single-payer healthcare rail against health care reform by labeling it as socialism. What is socialism? It’s a theory that advocates vesting the ownership of the means of production and distribution in the community as a whole. Everybody needs health care. No one can live long without it. It is a perfect industry for public management, just like police protection and national defense."
Here's one of the many responses on this same site that I agreed with:
" I have a significant problem with anyone approaching health care from the position that it "is, and should be considered, a right." No one has a right to healthcare. Legitimate rights have one thing in common: they are rights to action, not to rewards from other people. The American rights impose no obligations on other people, merely the negative obligation to leave you alone. The system guarantees you the chance to work for what you want not to be given it, without effort, by somebody else. So - those who WANT healthcare must pay for it. If you WANT a government-run healthcare option, here's a simple solution. Those who WANT to use it MUST pay for it...all of it. No passing the buck to others. You want it, you pay for it, leave the rest of us alone. "
Let me boil it down to a single question:
Please explain to me how the single-payer nationalized health services we currently have in this country (Medicare, Veterans Administration, FDA, CDC, police, fire, etc) are any less socialized than a national healthcare plan?
Or do you vote to get rid of ALL of those as well?
The Government plans have plenty of deductibles and copayments also. Most of the Vets, Seniors and poorer people also need healthcare the most. I think we should take care of those that need healthcare the most, but to jump to the conclusion that therefore we should insure the entire country including non citizens?
My question is why is it all or nothing? Why can't we attempt to make substantial changes gradually? Why not cover everyone for preventive care or for emergency stays and let the insurance companies fill the gaps?
The Insurance Companies have way too much leverage. They make huge profits and can drop people on a dime or refuse to cover certain conditions. These are things that can be fixed without a complete overhaul that the Dems are demanding.
That's been one of the problems of 90% of the government programs in our country Joe from both sides of the aisle. They never end up as what it started as.
As for preventative care, for preventative care it's pretty useless legislating western legislation for this as western medicine SUCKS for preventative care as western preventative care is focused on patentable treatments. Eastern medicine is far better. I have a chinese herbologist in Chicago that I go to for preventative care that I need treatment for. 50 bucks and she'll put together a tea of sticks and leaves that perform far better than any prescription for things like mild food poisoning.
Now I'm just a property adjuster but I know how insurance companies think and there's no way in heck they'll have a health care plan that includes leaf and stick tea. Can't blame them as there's a lack of education on this in general, but you can't legislate this into action. The free market will need to provide a sort of "alternative medicine" health care plan and the only way to create that is to create the demand for it. I'm not sure how to create the demand for it aside from education.
Tim
The Hippocratic Oath doesn't state that if a patient is going to die if they don't get a kidney transplant that the doctor is required to give them a transplant if they can't afford it.
Unfortunately, plenty of people die every year because they can't afford emergency health care...in spite of the Hippocratic Oath...
Though I do agree with you that we're more talking about preventative care when discussing reform...
Huh?
Are you saying that they'll get the transplant if they wait long enough?
This is just flat-out not true.
They won't get kicked out the hospital...that part is true. Which just means that the doctors and nurses will be attending to them until they die of kidney failure.
Death while being overseen in a hospital is hardly an optimal outcome when a relatively common procedure would have saved their life. This is all that is currently guaranteed by our system.
The answer's on the back of your driver's license. I'm a registered organ donor. Are you? This is not a question to Jason; this is to everyone reading this. Are you a registered organ donor? If you whine and complain about people dying for lack of a kidney and don't take 5 minutes to become a registered donor, governments/doctors/healthcare systems are not the reason people are dying on a waiting list. You are.
I don't need to read a bill thats 1000 + pages long. Any bill this size is meant to shield eyes from reading.
Here is an example of how bills should be written:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1207
No need for in depth legal jargon.