Republican Insane Ramblings

[ryan costa]

it costs so much to fight frivolous lawsuits because the lawyers have engineered the system to operate that way.

You heard a rumor about someone hearing a rumor about an obstetrician being sued by the parents of a girl who wasn't accepted into her college of choice 18 years later. Did the obstetrician lose to this lawsuit? how much did it cost them or their liability insurance?

If you work in the shoe department at K-Mart or Sears, you will deal with wackoes returning shoes after wearing them for weeks, and you will give them refunds or credit. because it is standard policy. even if they are returning shoes they didn't buy from the store.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
2 links for everyone to consider.

First, hits right at your point, Jim. Seems health insurance cos. fear the death of their golden goose so they are paying for their people to make any claim they can think of and hope they find just 1 thats scares the average person from wanting Universal health care. See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/crazy-wingnut-healthcare_b_243075.html

One no so crazy (crazy part is she made it as a reason not to do reform) of the claims highlighted in the link is a claim that universal health care will save us 40%. I was thinking around 30% but I hope she's right.

Second, one of my favorite and most honest politicans, Ron Paul has commented on the Health care reform. He might not have said what you would have thought, but it shows he does have a heart and agrees Americans deserve health care over endless wars. See: Dr. No says, Make love, not war

[Roy Pitchford]

First, hits right at your point, Jim. Seems health insurance cos. fear the death of their golden goose so they are paying for their people to make any claim they can think of and hope they find just 1 thats scares the average person from wanting Universal health care. See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/crazy-wingnut-healthcare_b_243075.html

Let's consider the source:

Cesca has been known to endlessly fawn about Barack Obama, going as far as banning users from his blog that leave comments that are negative about Obama, or his policies. This has caused controversy in the liberal blogosphere, with many referring to Bob Cesca as "Bobamatron".

Sounds like a nice guy, just who I would turn to for un-biased commentary.

Second, one of my favorite and most honest politicans, Ron Paul has commented on the Health care reform. He might not have said what you would have thought, but it shows he does have a heart and agrees Americans deserve health care over endless wars. See: Dr. No says, Make love, not war

I won't dispute that health care has some significant flaws. If I read the article right, Dr. Paul agrees with that. I would say most people do. There are some things I agree with him on and some things I don't. BUT, the government's current attempt at a solution is wrong.
As for the assertion of 'make love not war', depends on the situation, in my opinion. FDR wanted his "second Bill of Rights" that he proposed during his State of the Union in 1944, which included "The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health".
I think WW2 was a little more important.

Let's run down some of the stuff in the bill itself:

• Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the gov option.
• 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/
• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you.
• 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 Healthcard.
• 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.
• 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.
• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services.
• 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.
• 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 doesnt' 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.
• 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."
• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."
• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what speciality you have, you'll all be paid the same.
• 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.
• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures.
• 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: Telehealth Advisory Committee.
• 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.
• 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.
• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations.
• 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.

[sarcasm]I don't know about you, but I can't imagine why they'd want to rush this through before the August recess. The approval ratings of the entire Congress and the President would shoot through the roof if everyone knew this stuff.[/sarcasm]

[Brian Pedaci]

Roy, I doubt you compiled those points yourself. Mind sharing a link to your source on those, because some of them are just dead wrong. I'm looking through the bill point by point, and while some are arguable, some say exactly the opposite of what you're arguing here.

[Brian Pedaci]

My edit time expired, so here's just the first few points for the sake of backing up my argument:

• Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the gov option.
>> Yes, this is known as an individual mandate. All privately-offered plans will have to meet some minimum benefits to be a 'qualified plan'. After enactment of the bill, no new enrollment will be allowed on non-qualified plans. If you can't find a suitable qualified plan, that's what the public option is for.
• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure.
>>They will be studied, not audited. The purpose is to produce a report that shows whether or not there's an unintended incentive for small-to-medium-size companies to self-insure.
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed.
>>Absolutely false. It says nothing of the sort. Page 29 does have a provision that says there will be a limit on cost-sharing (e.g a deductible). Maybe that's where your source is confused (and that's a pretty profound confusion)
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get/
>>A government commitee. Consisting of whom? Bureaucrats and legislators? No. Medical experts. Who defines coverages for your insurance company, Roy?
• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you.
>>They will oversee the bureaucracy (someone has to) and work with State insurance regulators to make sure that plans which are offered are in compliance with the minimum coverages and other requirements. I do not see where they are empowered to set benefits. There is a bit about them determining eligibility for 'affordability credits', which would be offered to families who make up to 400 percent of the poverty level to help offset the cost. But that's not the same as 'deciding benefits'.

I could go on, but what's the point? There's enough stretching the truth, selective parsing of text and whole-cloth invention going on in that analysis that it doesn't hold any authority. I'd love to read a good, point-by-point breakdown of exactly where the arguments lie, but this appears to be finding argument for arguments' sake.

[Grace O'Malley]

I am tired of people who listen to the anti-Canada health care propaganda and repeat it as if it were completely true.

Let me tell you firsthand how the system works for the average Canadian. I have a dear friend from Kitchener, in Ontario province, who has young children and I have spoken to her at length about the pros and cons of the insurance system there. I will tell you that her family is extremely pleased and grateful for the coverage and services it provides.

The family has an ID card that she shows at any appointment; she has no paperwork to fill out and receives no bills. Having two young boys, I asked her how frequently they visit the doctor and how easy it is to get in. She told me that in addition to their yearly check-ups, she can call and get an appointment WITHIN ONE WEEK for any complaint. She has never had to wait to get in and see a doctor. and any prescriptions are covered, as well. In addition, the entire family has eye and dental coverage. They can get a new pair of glasses each year and even a pair of Rx sunglasses. Dental work and orthodontics is covered as well. Her husband is a construction worker and is often laid off for a few weeks at a time. They doesn't lose coverage when he's off and if he or she takes another job, their insurance remains the same. The family has one member with a chronic condition and another had a life-threatening illness. They are cared for properly and promptly. SHE LOVES HER HEALTH COVERAGE AND IS TOTALLY SATISFIED.

In contrast, look at what I deal with. I wait for appointments and care here in the US.Try making an appointment with a specialist around here - a dermatologist generally has a 6 month wait and so do cardiologists. I have a co-pay for every single appointment and test. My Rx costs have gone from $3 per Rx to $20 for a generic and $40 for brand. My insurance company limits the choices my doctor can make in prescribing by forcing me to take a generic form and only covering certain classes and types of drugs for different conditions. Certain tests are not covered even if my doctor thinks I need it.

If I or my husband lose or change jobs, we face a loss or change in benefits. Some people in my family have "pre-existing" conditions and I fear one day they won't be able to get coverage. We have no eye or dental. Routine dental checkups and cleaning, X-rays are totally out of my pocket and outrageously priced. I can go to an ophthalmologist to get my eyes checked, but any cost associated with refraction is up to me. Glasses, which half my family requires, are all on me, as well, and if you have priced lenses for severe myopia and astigmatism lately, they are not cheap.

We have had cancer in the immediate family; I cannot begin to tell you what a burden it was to have to deal with the bills, the paperwork, and the insurance. Each week I would be treated to a bill that wasn't paid because "it wasn't coded properly." I'd have to call my insurance who would tell me why it didn't get paid, call the hospital or doctor and explain how to rebill, then do it all over again when it still didn't get paid. Ask the hospital or insurance to call each other directly instead of using me as a middleman and get told that "that's not our job." Who's job it is, mine? Under our system I guess it is. Hope to God you never have a seriously ill family member and have to deal with the added stress of all the insurance crap.

Sorry, but I'll take the Canadian system any day over what we have.

[Roy Pitchford]

Roy, I doubt you compiled those points yourself. Mind sharing a link to your source on those, because some of them are just dead wrong. I'm looking through the bill point by point, and while some are arguable, some say exactly the opposite of what you're arguing here.

You're right, I didn't compile them myself.

Source

I suppose I'll be tell me its no more reliable than the commentary article I chastized above. However, I'm glad to see that people are actually reading the bill, even if its to shoot down false premises.

[Roy Pitchford]

I could go on, but what's the point? There's enough stretching the truth, selective parsing of text and whole-cloth invention going on in that analysis that it doesn't hold any authority. I'd love to read a good, point-by-point breakdown of exactly where the arguments lie, but this appears to be finding argument for arguments' sake.

I would love to see someone break down the bill in a non-partisan way and give us some non-legalese version of the bill. There would appear to be plenty of time to do it given the August recess.
You seemed to be doing a decent job of it. Even if there is bias on your end, it would give some perspective.

However, this whole debate simply underscores one of many issues in Washington.
Interpretation.
The author of the item I quoted read them one way. You, Brian, read them to mean something quite different. Bills seem to be written in such a way that they can be interpretted to fit whatever situation is necessary. Does that worry anyone else?

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
I would also love to see an unbiased explanation of the bill as would you Mr. Pitchford (sorry for earlier misspelling) but it is difficult with all the misinformation the insurance companies are spewing. There are Billions of dollars of profit at stake for them. They will say and do anything possible to mislead good people such as yourself. Did you see this? http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html There's an Executive being honest. Now, given what he said, I suggest you go rent Sicko. The Executive says M. Moore got it right.

Few bills are ever perfect. But getting health care when its needed is very important. I believe a public option will serve as a bellwether for the health care industry. Right now there are no checks and balances to stop the greed of these insurance companies. They exist currently to make a profit first, and if they can't avoid it then pay as little as possible for the coverage they need to supply.

Did you see this story?: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/17/business/fi-rescind17 Once Blue Cross was able to dump these people, where could they get medical coverage? Individually, nowhere.

Under England's health care doctors are rewarded, not for reducing costs, but for having healthier patients. Because if a doctor works hard to get his patients healthier then the costs will drop.

[Mike Coleman]

The simple problem is that our health care system is all about profit. Think about it. Who profits when you get sick? Say for example someone on this board, private insurance or not, has chest pains and is rushed to the hospital. Who profits? Well, how about the dispatcher who feeds his family taking the call. And then the EMS people--they have kids in college, too. Then the administrators, the ER people, the drug companies, the medical supply companies, the cardiologist, the gym that you join to rehab, etc., etc., etc. And after it is all done, the insurance people sweep in and take their share of the pie as well. Now with all of these people--mostly good people I'm sure--earning their living by you and me getting sick, of course it is going to cost a lot. The more people that get in the game, the higher the cost. My guess is by eliminating the private insurance companies and their profit--taking billions and billions out of the process--is one way to cut costs. The only way to cut costs is to eliminate vast amounts of people and professions that earn their living off of illness.

And I'm begging you all not to buy into the rationing scare. If they do ration, it's only exactly what's going on now. You think the Aetnas of the world didn't get rich by denying coverage? If you don't, then you don't know anyone who's actually dealt with illness.

[Roy Pitchford]

Hi,
I would also love to see an unbiased explanation of the bill as would you Mr. Pitchford (sorry for earlier misspelling) but it is difficult with all the misinformation the insurance companies are spewing. There are Billions of dollars of profit at stake for them. They will say and do anything possible to mislead good people such as yourself. Did you see this? http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html There's an Executive being honest. Now, given what he said, I suggest you go rent Sicko. The Executive says M. Moore got it right.

I will grant you that there is going to be misinformation, but do not forget for one moment that it will exist from any of the many sides of a given story.

As for all the issues about profit, why do you begrudge people profit?
Is it just the particular field (health care)?
Is it the profit margin (roughly 30% from what I hear)?

[ryan costa]

there is a series of books called "the value of a dollar" by Scott Derks.

http://www.amazon.com/Value-Dollar-Mill ... 1891482491

He just lists the average or modal or median cost of most goods and services by year. In addition, he lists the average incomes by vocation by year. the cost of suits, shoes, education, and a visit to the doctor keeps going up relative to the value of work.

People may cite outlandish lawsuits as "evidence". what are the exact legal and settlement costs relative to the total cost of healthcare? if you eliminated those costs, how much would healthcare still total?

Some doctors say poor health habits (over eating, lack of exercise) cause a large chunk of illnesses. at least for the first 60 years:

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/ ... 4#31706746

post-industrial economic growth relies mostly on sprawl(oil addiction) and fast food. All the enormous subsidies to grain monoculture subsidizes the billionaire fastfood icons and chain restaurant heroes. The big meatpacking feedlots and slaughterhouses are subsidized by cheap grain and subsidized by illegal immigrant labor. Billionaire fastfood barons are subsidized by the feds and by illegal immigrants. healthy food is generally cheaper than prepared foods and fast food. but preparing it cuts into the time folks have for watching television or talking on the cell phone. In conclusion, American Protectionism was the only moral system. American Protectionism was the only rational system. Unionized slaughterhouses employing legal residents are the only moral system and rational system.

there is ample evidence that health care should be reformed. there is more evidence the private sector will fail, and the government will also fail. Obama is failing by jumping the gun. He should not rush to reform. He should rush to educate. Americans need to be educated about the living habits of people in healthier nations, and the healthcare infrastructure of those nations. Japan, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Ireland, Iceland, New Zealand, Cuba, Orkney, Tasmania. Pick any of them.

Conservative pundits may argue this means that Obama hates guns and deep fried reconstituted chicken breasts and sports bars with 12 televisions. the televangelist cargo culters may call him a muslim.

the pharmaceutical companies are generally corrupt. they'll repackage and rebrand the same drugs in slightly different concentrations or carrier molecules. then market the disease. heart burn! Alcohol withdrawl! ED! it is hard to watch television for 30 minutes without seeing adds for xanax, prozac, cialis, viagra, abilify, tums, tic tacs, snickers, pepsi, coke, mcdonalds, papa johns

[Jim O'Bryan]

.