Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: OafOfOffice
Obama 06/12/09 "So I just want to repeat: The single biggest problem we have in terms of the debt and the deficit is healthcare. . . . The real problem is Medicaid and Medicare. That's the nightmare scenario."

32 trillion is promised in government run medical programs which is bankrupt for the most part or due to run out. And how is putting another 50 million people in a government medical program going to help that problem? Unless of course, we give up our health care plans and give obama the premiums we pay instead. Thats 50 million uninsured because they are illegal or cannot afford insurance, or are between jobs, or could apply for medi-cal /medicaid but have not. Another percentage of that 50 million invincible young feel they do not need it. Some have it offered at work but refuse to pay for their healthcare. They have other priorities. So who is going to pay for the 50 million not able to pay anything?

Now as Obama takes your wealth and hands it to Jeff Immelt of General electric, obama also got his buddy Daschle a nice board membership in GE's healthyimagination medical registry. The one that will decide who gets rationed. The daschle who wrote the book on healthcare reform that looks justlike the chart of obama big government health reform Boehners released.

As President-elect Obama's apparent choice for health and human services secretary and as White House health care czar, it is a fair guess that Tom Daschle's view on health care legislation may be decisive.

"Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis," in which the gracious former Senate leader lays out without equivocation both the policy he recommends and the tactics for how to pass it.

He proposes setting up a board to establish standards for health care delivery in the United States that would be modeled on how the Federal Reserve Board and Securities and Exchange Commission oversee banks and corporations.

On Page 179, he writes, "The Federal Health Board wouldn't be a regulatory agency, but its recommendations would have teeth because all federal health programs would have to abide by them." Although his board technically would have no say on the 68 percent of health care that is provided through the private sector, at the bottom of Page 179, Daschle modestly adds: "Congress could opt to go further with the Board's recommendations. It could, for example, link the tax exclusion for health insurance to insurance that complies with the Board's recommendation."

Those last 19 words would spell the end of independent private-sector health care in America. Obviously, no health insurance would be sold if it were denied the tax deduction. Thus, every policy, every standard decided by this board would be the law of the land for every drug company, every hospital, every doctor and every health insurance company.

in the section in which he identifies "losers" under his plan, Daschle is admirably candid. Among the explicit "losers," he includes: "Doctors and patients might resent any encroachment on their ability to choose certain treatments, even if they are expensive or ineffectual compared to alternatives. Some insurers might object to new rules that restrict their coverage decisions. And the health-care industry would have to reconsider its business plan (emphasis added)." That is to say, they can stay in business and deliver their services, but only as the government bureaucrats say they may. They no longer would be genuinely independent.

We have already seen Obama tell private corporations what they can or cannot do and with threats.

One of the things that Daschle says will have to change is the "technology arms race" he claims hospitals are engaging in "to attract aging baby boomers with the latest diagnostic imaging machines." Imagine that, offering customers the latest technology, which, as Daschle admits on Page 125, "help(s) doctors estimate the spread of cancer or the extent of cardiac disease without surgery."

Recent cost cutting measures announced by drug companies, hospitals, insurance companies, medical device manufacturers, labor unions.

1. Cut diagnostic imaging tests like MRIs and CAT scans.

2. Reduce the use of antibiotics.

3. Perform fewer Caesarean sections.

4. Cut care for management of chronic back pain

Of course, for Daschle, the problem with such high-tech diagnostics is that it leads to treatment. On pages 123-124, he cites a study approvingly for the proposition that there are too many angiograms being performed. By too many, he specifically cites a study of 828 angioplasties in which only a third were likely to benefit the patients. Another half might or might not, and 14 percent were not likely. Now I might conclude that if 85 percent of the patients receiving the treatment might benefit (the one-third who definitely would and the 50 percent who might) and if I were one of them, I might want the procedure. But for Daschle, that would be a waste of money, and "the imaging test that shows narrowing of the arteries was to blame (for the excessive treatment)."

What followed is my favorite line in the book: "When the test revealed a narrowing of the artery, however slight, cardiologists couldn't resist doing something about it." Imagine a doctor trying to cure his patient.

Cardiologists may have thought they were carrying out their responsibilities. But under the Daschle(/Obama?) plan, political hacks appointed to the Health board will decide whether your cardiologist is allowed to image your arteries and, if they find blockage, try to treat it successfully.

But that is not all he doesn't like about private-sector health care. On Page 174, he points out the dangers of letting drug companies advertise their products to the public: The public may want the drugs even if some Washington bureaucrat likes another drug instead.

He believes that Americans are not entitled to just any care that might do some good. Yep, Page 122: "Many patients with insurance want any care that might do some good, and plenty of doctors will oblige them."

Recognizing that some of these ideas may not be vastly popular, he recommends two basic legislative strategies.

First, seek to pass the legislation early in the first year of the president's first term, when he is most popular and is least likely to be resisted.

That is a valid analysis.

Quotes: We’ve got to get it done this year,” Mr. Obama said, standing on the South Lawn of the White House, surrounded by House Democratic leaders. “We’ve got to get it done this year, both in the House and Senate. We don’t have any excuses.”

"This next 6-8 weeks is going to be critical," he told his audience, asking them to help pressure Congress to get it done. If the country puts off health care reform, he said, "it's never going to happen."

The other strategy, which is very smart, is to leave the nasty details out of the bill. He says that was one of Clinton's mistakes in 1993. Clinton put too many details in the bill, thus alerting those who disagreed to mount an opposition (pages 108-109). Daschle recommends passing a vague bill and then "a Federal Health Board should be charged with establishing the system's framework and filling in most of the details. This independent board would be insulated from political pressure."

Obama said last week, just pass a bill, details can be worked out later.

(Congress did the same with the stimulus, omnibus and 2010 budget. No one read it. Now we face a 1100 page climate bill that no one has read.)

By "political pressure," he means the democratic process of electing fellow citizens to Congress who then pass legislation about which the public is informed before final passage -- and about which they may wish to petition their government for redress of grievances. Apparently, we can end petty bickering and partisanship by not letting anyone know what the new laws will contain.

Obama Stimulus Plan

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.

Someone you can't vote out like Obama's 32 czars.

He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Your great leader is exempt. Obama plans on being POTUS forever so he has to have the best of healthcare. And for those wanting Universal health care or single payer, I can onlysay take a good look at Obama's 18 million dollar website to show you where the stimulus dollars are going. This is the person who will set up administration that costs less than private insurance companies?

443 posted on 07/18/2009 12:12:40 PM PDT by OafOfOffice (Constitution is not neutral.It was designed to take the government off the backs of people-Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies ]


To: OafOfOffice

The Kennedy HealthCare bill would transfer enormous power over health care to Washington

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm2481.cfm


444 posted on 07/18/2009 12:21:51 PM PDT by OafOfOffice (Constitution is not neutral.It was designed to take the government off the backs of people-Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson