REBUTTING OBAMA'S HEALTH CARE SPEECH
In his hour long speech on health care, he failed to spend even a moment rebutting the central critique of his program: His inability to provide quality medical care for 30 million new patients without any additional doctors or nurses.
The shortage of medical personnel which will inevitably accompany the expansion of the patient population will leave some element - and perhaps all -- without adequate care. Like the man who sleeps with a blanket that is too small, either his neck or his feet will get cold unless he gets a bigger blanket.
The result of expanding the demand for medical services without augmenting the supply of doctors or nurses must be the rationing of medical care. And rationing will inevitably take its greatest toll among the elderly, forcing them to forgo elective surgery or, if their remaining quality years are likely to be limited, to do without vital life-prolonging treatment. Inevitably, we will all have to wait many more days, weeks, months or years for care we now receive on demand.
Obama will cut Medicare and that portion of Medicaid which serves the elderly in nursing homes (75 percent) in two ways:
(a) As he said in his speech, he will cut "hundreds of millions in waste and fraud and unwarranted subsidies in Medicare." To identify this "waste and fraud" he proposes to establish a commission within the Executive Branch to investigate the program and initiate cuts. Congress will have only sharply limited power to override these reductions or else they will automatically take effect.
Obama admits that these cuts will largely take the form of reducing reimbursement rates for hospitals and doctors. Paid less per office visit, doctors will spend less time on each patient. Reimbursed less for MRIs or CT Scans, they will order fewer of them. And getting less income, more doctors will retire and fewer will enter the profession aggravating the scarcity.
The president also plans to eliminate the Medicare Advantage program, an approach to managed care which permits the elderly a coherence and a coordination in their treatment that about one-third of them find valuable enough to sign up for.
(b) His newly established panel to cut Medicare will also "encourage the adoption of...common sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals...reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan."
These are code words for the rationing the imbalance in supply and demand will cause. The panel will "encourage" doctors to adopt the "best practices" the panel recommends by limiting reimbursement rates or even banning alternatives. Likely guidelines will govern who can get elective surgery like hip replacements or new knees based on the number of QARYs "quality adjusted remaining years" the patient has.
For example, in Canada, the drug Avastin is barred by just such a panel despite its proven track record as the most effective anti-colon cancer drug on the market. The ban is not because of any safety concerns, but solely due to its $50,000 annual cost. As a direct result, 41% of Canadians with colon cancer die as opposed to 32% of Americans. It is just these kinds of "best practices" that the panel will have to impose to pay for Obama's plan.
The panel will likely recommend limits on testing and screening, worsening rather than improving preventative care. In Canada, for example, there is an eight month wait for colonoscopies which leads to a 25% higher incidence of colon cancer.
Together, these cuts in Medicare will pay for more than half of the subsidies in Obama's program. And what will the money be used for? To pay for medical coverage for people who are too young for Medicare, too wealthy for Medicaid, and too old for the Children's Health Insurance Program. The president claims that this coverage will be "affordable" for those now uninsured. But the guidelines in the bill indicate that a person making about $30,000 a year will have to pay approximately 8% of his income in premiums before the subsidies kick in -- $2400 a year. Many of those now uninsured will find this expenditure both onerous and unnecessary in view of their current youth and good health.
Obama claims that "our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close." He's wrong. Medicare and Medicaid costs have risen by about 5% in the past year while the budget deficit has quadrupled. The deficit is caused by the massive overspending in the TARP program bailing out banks and the equally gargantuan stimulus package, throwing money - ineffectually - at the recession.
The president reports that "the reforms I'm proposing will not apply to those who are here illegally." This statement is also a half-truth. Illegal immigrants will be eligible to buy health insurance from the insurance exchange Obama creates, taking advantage of the lower rates he claims it will allow through bulk purchasing. And, without any effective provision for citizenship verification, will inevitably slip through the cracks and get subsidized coverage.
He boasts that "nothing in this plan will force you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have." But the rationing his program will force will make those insurance companies and doctors impotent in the face of federal mandates for reduced care.
The president's plan is, essentially, a program to take medical care away from the elderly and give it to those who are not younger, healthier, and - in the main - richer.
------------
Support for Health Care Plan Falls Back To Pre-Speech Levels
Following President Obama’s speech to Congress last week, support for his health care reform
plan increased steadily to a peak of 51% yesterday. However, the bounce appears to be over. The latest daily tracking shows that support has fallen all the way back to pre-speech levels.
Forty-five percent (45%) of all voters nationwide now favor the plan while 52% are opposed. A week ago, 44% supported the proposal and 53% were opposed. (see day-by-day numbers).
The latest figures show that 23% Strongly Favor the plan and 41% are Strongly Opposed. In late August, 23% were strongly in favor of the plan and 43% were strongly opposed. Premium Members can see full demographic crosstabs for results released today, Monday, Sunday, Saturday, Friday, Thursday and, for comparison, late August.
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll is another indicator of the speech's impact, and there, too, the bounce in approval Obama has been getting since the Wednesday night speech appears to have ended. Job Approval ratings are updated each morning at 9:30 EDT.
Rasmussen Reports will continue tracking support for the proposals on a daily basis over the next several days and will release new updates each morning at 9 EDT. After this week, Rasmussen Reports will continue tracking the issue on a weekly basis.
Fifty-one percent (51%) now say that health care reform is at least somewhat likely to pass this year. That figure includes 18% who say passage is Very Likely. In a survey Sunday night, 55% said the plan was at least somewhat likely to pass this year. That was the highest total yet recorded.
If the plan passes, 27% of voters now say the quality of care will get better and 46% say it will get worse. In August, the numbers were 23% better and 50% worse.
Forty-seven percent (47%) say passage of the plan will make the cost of health care go up while 20% say it will make costs go down. In August, 52% thought the plan would lead to higher costs, and only 17% thought it would achieve the stated goal of lowering costs.
Prior to the president's speech, most people with insurance said it’s likely they would be forced to change coverage if the plan passes. As Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, explained in a recent Wall Street Journal column: “The most important fundamental is that 68% of American voters have health insurance coverage they rate good or excellent … Most of these voters approach the health care reform debate fearing that they have more to lose than to gain.”
Voters overwhelmingly believe that every American should be able to buy the same health insurance plan that Congress has. Most favor limits on jury awards for medical malpractice claims and think that tort reform will significantly reduce the cost of health care.
And a government-run co-op or a trigger is just a public option by another name or delayed, and Americans don’t want it. Do not be fooled and let you Congressman and Senators know… No Public Option, No Government-run Co-Op, No Trigger!!!!
Also no funding for abortions, not coverage for illegals, no free translation services for non-English speaking people.
Source: DickMorris.com/Rassussen Poll
Posted: True Health Is True Wealth
No comments:
Post a Comment