Showing posts with label rationing for the disabled. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rationing for the disabled. Show all posts

Sunday, January 5, 2014

HEALTHCARE REFORM'S FIRST BIG TEST

“The portion of this email which I have highlighted in red is what HMO's have been doing all along. I watched a 2020 televised  expose on Humana doing this 20 years ago (but this is the first time I've seen it in print). All the money they don't spend to treat us they get to divide  up among themselves. Does that sound like an incentive to give us the healthcare many older Americans will/may need?? Not in my book.” Deonia Copeland

PEORIA, Illinois (Reuters) - By all accounts, Sandy Wright of Mackinaw, Illinois, is a challenging patient. The spunky 69-year-old with a rare autoimmune disease has been in the hospital more than a dozen times since she was first diagnosed in 1997.

"You name it, I've had it," Wright says. "I'm a very hard case."

Now, patients like Wright are at the forefront of an experiment, under way in Peoria, Illinois, and hundreds of other U.S. cities, that could transform the way doctors, nurses and hospitals deliver care to patients. Amid the barrage of criticism over the rollout of Obamacare, groups known as Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) are quietly going about the business of testing the potential for healthcare reform.

The efforts, born of President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act, are part of the biggest experiment yet to fix the costly and error-plagued U.S. healthcare system. The new models of care, which encourage providers to form networks to coordinate care and cut costs, involve close monitoring of the sickest patients to address budding health problems before they cause a costly trip to the emergency room or an extended hospital stay. Providers that succeed in keeping patients healthy and cutting costs are rewarded with a portion of the savings.

In Peoria, a city of 116,000 that is often seen as the archetypal middle American community, two hospital systems - OSF Healthcare and UnityPoint Health - are taking on the challenge.

Progress so far is largely anecdotal, but early data showing declines in readmissions and emergency room visits offers a tantalizing glimpse into the potential for reform. Still, there are no guarantees that the savings will exceed the costs.

OSF is in its second year of participating in the federal Pioneer Accountable Care Organization, a pilot program involving 32 hospital systems across the country that aims to improve quality while cutting costs in the government's Medicare insurance program for the elderly.

The program rewards doctors and medical centers that show gains on 33 measures of quality, including routine cancer and depression screenings, while still managing to cut overall costs. In its first year, 13 hospitals reported savings. OSF was not one of them, but it came close.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has not allowed providers to disclose their full first-year results, but Tara Canty, chief operations officer of OSF's Accountable Care Organization, said the hospital system saw a 30 percent drop in emergency room admissions and a 20 percent drop in inpatient stays among Medicare participants.

Canty sees the first two years as a learning process but says she will be "upset personally" if OSF is not achieving savings by year three.

Dr. Keith Knepp, chief information officer at UnityPoint Health-Methodist, says reforms are needed, but he sometimes finds it hard to stay optimistic. "Will there be reimbursement to reward the improved quality, or will we spend more money to take in less?"

Success may depend on controlling costs among high-use patients like Wright. She is among the 5 percent of OSF patients who consumes more than 50 percent of the care delivered by the system.

FOCUS ON THE 5 PERCENT

Wright spends most of her days in her tidy home in Mackinaw, outside Peoria, tooling around in a motorized wheelchair. Her legs swell up, making her prone to blood clots. Two years ago in November, she had a major complication from her blood thinner drug, Coumadin.

"My brain started bleeding. They had to drill holes in my head," Wright recalls of the ordeal, which kept her in the hospital for nearly a month. "I nearly died twice."

Wright was among the first of OSF's Pioneer patients to be assigned a care manager, a nurse charged with keeping her healthy and out of the hospital.

"The theory here is if you focus on the people with chronic disease who are your highest utilizers of care … and make a better outcome for those patients, you are able to invest that savings into some of the care for the larger population of patients," said Michelle Conger, OSF's chief strategy officer.

Like most providers across the country, Peoria's hospitals have been hit by federal budget cuts and burdened by an outdated reimbursement system focused on how many services they perform rather that quality.

OSF, a system of eight acute-care hospitals with $6 billion in annual patient revenue, needs to cut $200 million over the next five years in response to reimbursement cuts from Medicare and other payers. It has adopted the ACO model to help it get there.

An actuarial firm is combing through claims data for the 34,000 Medicare patients in OSF's ACO to help identify patients like Wright, whose high-risk conditions are likely to require more emergency room visits or admissions. The system assigned 35 care managers to work with these patients and come up with ways to prevent more acute health crises.

Sometimes that means simply helping patients keep track of their medications or arranging transportation to a pharmacy, said Priscilla Romans, a nurse who works in OSF's call center.

It also means routine checks on high-risk patients. During a call last month, a heart failure patient complained of shortness of breath and a headache. Romans asked whether she could put her shoes on that day. She was only able to get one on, a sign of fluid buildup, and she couldn't wear her rings.

Romans had the woman take her blood pressure, which was too high, and reported the findings to her doctor. The physician doubled the patient's dose of Lasix to cut the swelling in her hands and feet, and started her on a blood pressure medication.

When Romans called the next day, a Friday, the woman felt much better. Romans believes the time she spent on the phone with this patient helped avert a much more costly ER visit.

Often, the issues driving health costs are social. In one case, OSF discovered that a patient who kept getting readmitted to the hospital for emphysema had not been taking her medication.

"She was squirreling away her money to fix her roof," said Dr. Stephen Hippler, OSF's senior vice president for clinical excellence. The Catholic hospital system tapped into a charity program and made the repairs.

'GREAT SIGNALS'

UnityPoint Health-Methodist, Peoria's second-biggest provider, has been taking part in Medicare's Shared Savings ACO, a transitional program in which hospitals assume less risk than in the Pioneer ACO but have fewer potential rewards.

The hospital has cared for about 10,000 Medicare ACO patients since July 2012.

In November, UnityPoint acquired the 220-bed Procter Hospital, Peoria's third-largest provider, giving it access to new addiction recovery services and skilled nursing care. The Procter deal follows Methodist's decision in 2011 to join Iowa-based UnityPoint Health, the 13th-largest non-profit health system in the United States with annual revenue of $2.7 billion.

The moves are part of a national consolidation trend among hospitals trying to fill out their menu of services and bring costs under centralized control.

"There is a need for size and scale in the new environment," said Terry Waters, vice president for strategy and development at UnityPoint Health. "You have to be able to diversify your financial risk over a larger patient population."

According to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, an estimated 14 percent of the U.S. population is covered by some form of accountable care organization, including 4 million Medicare beneficiaries.

WILL IT WORK?

OSF could not say whether it has saved money on Wright's care in the two years since she has been in care management because the system does not release financial information about individual patients.

But Canty said the system "has seen significant and sustained declines in the cost of care for patients in care management."

As for Wright, she appreciates the quick access she now has to her doctors, but she still needs a lot of care.

In May, a hip implant had become infected and had to be replaced. While recovering, Wright developed a bothersome cough that turned out to be pulmonary fibrosis, a dangerous scarring of the lungs. "Between May 21 and July 19, I had been released and admitted five times. Five times! It was dreadful."

Romans, who has helped coordinate some of Wright's care, said her job is to try to keep patients out of the hospital, but that's not always possible. "Here we are trying to be financially prudent with our dollars, but the patient needed the care."

Now, the goal is to stretch out the period between visits.

Wright went from July to September with only one hospitalization. "It was quick. She went back home, and she hasn't been back to the hospital since," Romans said.

(Reporting by Julie Steenhuysen; Editing by Michele Gershberg and Douglas Royalty)

Monday, October 28, 2013

Betsy McCaughey: Obamacare designed to vastly expand single payer Medicaid by eviscerating Medicare

By Marion Algier – AskMarion – h/t to MJ 

Betsy McCaughey, an expert on the Affordable Care Act, was on the Kelly Files regarding more enrollees in Medicaid is a signal for Single-Payer.  McCaughey is the author of Beating Obamacare: Your Handbook for the New Healthcare Law, Decoding the Obama Health Law: What You Need To Know (Kindle) and Obama Health Law: What It Says and How to Overturn It (Encounter Broadsides) (Kindle).  She knows of what she speaks!!

Video: Betsy McCaughey: Obamacare designed to vastly expand single payer Medicaid by eviscerating Medicare

One of the key Obamacare architects Zeke Emanuel – Rahm Emanuel’s brother - has lot in common with Hitler. He supports the rationing of medical care - you know denying care for the elderly. Betsy McCaughey cited 2 examples on Megyn's show - 1) a 2008 JAMA article in which Zeke said doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously and focus too much on the needs of their patients. Instead they should be more focused on how resources can better be used for the young people. 2) He believes that 65 year olds have had their chance.

Video:  Obamacare Architect shares Hitler's values; Supports rationing of medical care for elderly

Rationing healthcare in a single-payer system where boards, a mandate committee, of primarily non-medical experts and non-medical practitioners, especially not your own doctor, decide on your treatment based on the good of the many… not the patient at hand, is socialized medicine and no matter how you spin it is a death panel system.  Someone will decide whether, or not, you, your grandparents, your special needs child or someone that the powers that be at the time don’t like get to have surgery, a major medical procedure or even an expensive medicine… or whether you will be left to suffer or just die.  That my friends is a death panel, exactly what Sarah Palin and others who read the ObamaCare Bill warned us of.  And because Palin was right and tried to warn Americans (about this and a lot of other things), the Progressives in power both hate and fear her, so the demonized her.  But Sarah and Betsy are right… there are death panels in this law.

In 2007, Senator Obama said he wanted to eliminate private health insurance.  And just recently Harry Reid admitted that the whole goal of ObamaCare is to get us all into a single payer system where the federal government controls one-sixth of our economy, will decide on who and when they will authorize treatment and will use the IRS as their enforcer to collect whatever premiums they set without competition.  Think about it!

And as for ole Zeke Emanual… he is for death panels! Inform yourself about his Complete Lives System.

Video:  Megyn Kelly Grills Zeke Emanuel on Obamacare Promises: Was Obama Lying or 'Grossly Mistaken'?

There are only two ways to stop this… (1) Win the House and the Senate in 2014 and then the White House in 2016 (2) and Repeal and then Replace ObamaCare!!

The time to get involved is now.  This whole ObamaCare rollout website disaster is the least of our worries!!… even if it did cost us $634 Million of taxpayer money paid to a Canadian company with ties to George Soros and Michelle Obama for a site that doesn’t work, and now we have to pay again to fix it.

Related:

Obama's Health Rationer-in-Chief

Ezekiel Emanuel & The Complete Lives System: part 3 of Health Care: Why We are Scared (Video) 

Doctors Quitting Over ObamaCare – Lindsey Williams –> Socialized Medicine… the Jewel of Socialism 

On the Road to Death Panels

Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, Says Constitution Backs Compulsory Abortion 

"People 70 and over will not be treated under Obamacare… and you thought DEATH PANELS were gone" 

Ezekiel Emanuel, architect of ObamaCare..please read

“Death Panel” Three Years Later 

Death Panels 101? Chilling High School Assignment Makes Students Decide Who Lives and Who Dies 

Bill O’Reilly on Socialism and a Shocking New Book 

Will Sick Babies Be Starved to Death Under Obamacare?

Useless Eaters  -  Eliminate the Useless Eaters: A Disease of the Elitist Mind

Saturday, August 3, 2013

The Petition for "Mandatory Euthanasia" for Senior Citizens Under Obama Care!

WATCH: Obamacare Supporters Sign Petition For ‘Mandatory Euthanasia’ Of Seniors

300713Dice-570x300

Video: The Petition for "Mandatory Euthanasia" for Senior Citizens Under Obama Care!

Comedian Mark Dice asks people to sign a mandatory euthanasia petition for Seniors, loosely citing the related provision in ObamaCare.  Look how many, especially young people, are willing to sign it.  It might seem a bit humorous now, to some, but as the reality that is now dawning on more and more people, even former DNC Chair Howard Dean, who excoriated those who realized this provision was in there all along, is now voicing his concern. As reality is sets in… It won’t be funny!!

And to those  young people who signed this petition… you will some day also be old, or it could be your parents, grandparents or mentor. As anyone knows who ever studied history or lived in a system where euthanasia is acceptable…

First it will be the seniors with chronic illnesses…

Then it will anyone over a certain age…

Then it will be the special needs and handicapped people

And then it will anyone who stands up or speaks out against the system!!

Be aware… and be afraid of this one!!

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Did Obama hint at health-care rationing in SOTU?

Video: Obama’s Full 5th SOTU Speech

WND: obama-state-of-the-union-340x161[1]Did President Obama hint at health-care rationing in last night’s State of the Union address?

In his speech, Obama listed health-care reform as a key in reducing long-term government debt, specifically referring to the “rising cost of health care for an aging population.”

“And those of us who care deeply about programs like Medicare must embrace the need for modest reforms,” he said.

Obama said he will work to “reduce taxpayer subsidies to prescription drug companies and ask more from the wealthiest seniors.”

“We’ll bring down costs by changing the way our government pays for Medicare, because our medical bills shouldn’t be based on the number of tests ordered or days spent in the hospital,” he said. “They should be based on the quality of care that our seniors receive.”

Obama’s comments about quality of care deserve careful consideration in light of largely overlooked sections of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly called Obamacare.

Those sections, reviewed in full by WND, may lay the foundations for health-care rationing and even so-called death panels.

There is also concern for preferential treatment based on race, ethnicity and so-called life preferences.

Obamacare called for the establishment of a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Obama’s comments:

The new institute’s purpose is to carry out “comparative clinical effectiveness research,” which is defined in the law as evaluating and comparing “health outcomes” and “clinical effectiveness, risks and benefits” of two or more medical treatments or services.

The purpose of the research is purportedly for the government to determine which treatments work best so that money is not spent on less effective treatments.

Such research was already previously funded for $1.1 billion in Obama’s 2009 “stimulus” package. The legislation first created a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Obamacare now allows for about $3.8 billion in additional funding for effectiveness research, with the establishment of the new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

The institute is to be governed by a board to assist in identifying research priorities and establishing the research project agenda.

Also weighing in will be an “expert advisory panel” of practicing and research clinicians, patients, and experts in scientific and health services research and health services delivery.

A section of Obamacare makes clear the secretary of health and human services may not use research data from the new institute in a manner that treats the life of an elderly, disabled or terminally ill individual as lower in value than that of an individual who is younger, non-disabled or not terminally ill.

However, that dictate comes with a qualifier some many find troubling.

Obamacare contains largely unreported text that allows the health secretary to limit any “alternative treatments” of the elderly, disabled or terminally ill if such treatments are not recommended by the new research institute.

The qualifier says:

Paragraph (1) shall not be construed as preventing the Secretary from using evidence or findings from such comparative clinical effectiveness research in determining coverage, reimbursement, or incentive programs under title XVIII based upon a comparison of the difference in the effectiveness of alternative treatments in extending an individual’s life due to the individual’s age, disability, or terminal illness.

Paragraph (1)” refers to the section that bars the Health Secretary from valuing the life of an elderly, disabled or terminally ill patient as lower than that of the younger or non-disabled patient.

The qualifier leaves the health secretary with the power to use government-provided research data to determine whether “alternative treatments” are effective in extending the life of the elderly, disabled or terminally ill.

Health-care rationing based on ethnicity?

Another section of Obamacare calls for the new institute to study the effectiveness of treatment in “subpopulations,” including “racial and ethnic minorities, women, age, and groups of individuals with different comorbidities, genetic and molecular sub-types, or quality of life preferences.”

The effectiveness of such research has been widely called into question.

In a 2009 study, the CATO Institute raised concerns about such government-funded research being politicized or influenced by lobbying.

“Unlike market-generated research, a federal comparative-effectiveness agency would be subject to political manipulation, which could block the generation of any useful research,” wrote CATO.

Continued CATO: “Such research necessarily poses a direct threat to the incomes of pharmaceutical manufacturers, medical device manufacturers, and millions of providers. If a government agency produces unwelcome research, those groups will spend vast sums on lobbying campaigns and political contributions to discredit or defund the agency.”

During the “stimulus” debate, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., fought the $1.1 billion spending on effectiveness research, spotlighting the experience of countries such as the U.K. as cautionary tales.

“Think about this a moment,” Kyl told the Senate. “Do you want Washington bureaucrats, such as those who brought you the AIG mess, making your health care decisions for you and your family?”

Currently, in the U.K., the equivalent to Obamacare’s Institute is the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, or NICE.

The New England Journal of Medicine related that NICE “considers treatments cost-effective if their cost-effectiveness ratio is £20,000 ($34,000) per QALY (quality adjusted life year).”

A QALY is an extra year of “quality” life expectancy, based on the treatment.

There were recent reports that NICE was refusing to fund four new treatments for kidney cancer because they only change a patient’s life expectancy from six months to a year.

Andrew Dillon, NICE chief executive, commented on the denial of one drug for kidney cancer: “Before we recommend any new treatment we have to be sure the evidence on how well it works is robust and that it is cost effective. We do not want to divert NHS funds to a treatment that costs more but doesn’t help people live longer.”

Writing in Forbes last month, Sally Pipes, president of the Pacific Research Institute, slammed effectiveness research under Obamacare as a “recipe for cook-book medicine, where the government can pressure doctors into prescribing treatments according to average results rather than an individual patient’s needs and preferences.”

Related:

Obama’s Fifth SOTU – State of the Union Speech  -  As well as Rubio and Paul’s Rebuttals

“Death Panel” Three Years Later

Obama Embraces 'Death Panel' Concept in Medicare Rule

Who Will Tell Michael J. Fox He Needs to Die?

Death Panels are HERE

On the Road to Death Panels

America – Land of the Mis, Under and Low Informed

Book:  Fool Me Twice: Obama's Shocking Plans for the Next Four Years Exposed

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Doctors Quitting Over ObamaCare - Lindsey Williams –> Socialized Medicine… the Jewel of Socialism

Video: Lindsey Williams - Doctors Quitting Over ObamaCare

Obamacare Set To Crash Entire Private Healthcare System – Force State-Run Coverage

The Ulsterman:  Lost in the myriad of reviews on Barack Obama’s second inauguration was this very interesting (and depressing) column clearly outlining the looming danger that Obamacare now poses for the entire healthcare system in the United States. And make no mistake – this result was INTENDED to usher in the era of total government control of how you will be born, how you will live, and how you will die…

(Remember the media ignoring when Barack Obama said at some point a dying patient needs to just “take a pill” and prepare for death? Well America…that time is now.)

EXCERPT: (Via RCM)

We Told You So…

As the Affordable Care Act–otherwise known as ObamaCare–begins to be implemented, we are seeing its first big consequence: it is making care less affordable.

…Lo and behold, we see reports today that insurance premiums are going up partly because of “new federal rules that increase the services that health insurers are required to include in the health plans they sell.”

…The rising premiums are bad enough in themselves, but they raise the prospect of crashing the whole structure of the health insurance system created by ObamaCare.

…But I don’t think that’s any kind of mystery. The consequences of ObamaCare – particularly the built-in “death spiral”– are so predictable that I don’t think the legislation’s architects can profess innocence. From the beginning, I have had suspicions, so to speak, that a stable health insurance industry was not the goal of ObamaCare. Rather, I warned: “It is an attempt to turn health insurance into what the left really wants: another welfare program in which everyone is entitled to free benefits, mandated by the government.”

…It smashes private health care–then leaves us stranded in the rubble, at which point we will be expected to come crawling back to the same people who caused the disaster and ask them to save us.”

The first half of our predictions from 2009 are already coming true. I am afraid that we’re going to have to come back in another few years, after the second half has come to fruition, and say once again: we told you so.

As the Affordable Care Act--otherwise known as ObamaCare--begins to be implemented, we are seeing its first big consequence: it is making care less affordable.

The New York Times reports that "Health insurance companies across the country are seeking and winning double-digit increases in premiums for some customers, even though one of the biggest objectives of the Obama administration's health care law was to stem the rapid rise in insurance costs for consumers."

"Even though"? In fact, Obamacare is simply doing what a lot of people predicted it would. Critics of ObamaCare warned that it would produce precisely the kind of premium increases we are now seeing, for precisely the reasons that new reports are now citing.

I was one of those critics, and I take no joy in pointing out that we told you so.

In 2009, as ObamaCare was being crammed through Congress, I gave three reasons for predicting disaster.

The first is "guaranteed issue," which requires insurance companies to cover you for a pre-existing condition. This forces insurance companies to take on extra costs, while reducing the incentive for healthy people to pay their insurance premiums. Why pay premiums for years, if you can just wait until you're already sick to buy coverage? So insurers are mandated to take on extra costs while losing revenues. As I wrote back in 2009, "Rather than increasing the number of insured by making health insurance more affordable, this bill makes health insurance more expensive and increases the incentive to simply drop your insurance until you need someone to pay for your medical bills."

And so we see today a report that as this takes effect and people who are already sick demand insurance, "paying for their care could add massive costs to the system."

"For one thing, they'll have no waiting period to get insurance. Someone who just got bad news from the heart doctor can walk into an insurance office and order a policy, Davis said. 'It's as if could you go home, see your house on fire, call Allstate and say, "Cover my home,"' Davis said.

"With medical bills easily reaching into the millions of dollars, a few of those cases could quickly add up, significantly boosting overall rates."

That leads to the second provision we warned about, the individual mandate. This is supposed to prevent free riders from waiting until they are sick by forcing them to buy insurance. But the penalty for refusing to buy insurance was set at $750, which is far lower than the cost of insurance. As I wrote back then, "we end up getting the worst of both worlds. This provision won't actually drive anyone to buy health insurance and prop up the risk pools for those who are insured. All it will accomplish is to create a brand new form of tax."

Finally, there are the federally mandated health-insurance exchanges, in which the federal government dictates what insurers are required to pay for, banning less expensive bare bones coverage and requiring insurance policies that cover more procedures and "preventative" tests. As I warned, "under the guise of making health insurance more affordable, this bill will restrict your menu of choices to include only the most expensive options."

Lo and behold, we see reports today that insurance premiums are going up partly because of "new federal rules that increase the services that health insurers are required to include in the health plans they sell."

There are also a couple of new reasons why rates are going up. We couldn't predict every negative effect of ObamaCare, because as Nancy Pelosi told us, Democrats had to pass the bill so we could find out what was in it. Thus, Peter Suderman points to a rule that requires insurance companies to refund part of their premiums if they don't spend enough on patient care in a particularly year. Suderman explains the results.

"If claims are low in a given year, they end up rebating the difference to the customer because of the MLR rule. If claims are unexpectedly high, however, they end up eating the difference. Insurers thus have an incentive to protect themselves by charging high premiums at the outset, and then paying those premiums back in rebates should claims come in at low or expected levels."

And then there is the extra cost passed on from new taxes on health insurance. Imagine that: when you tax something it becomes more expensive.

We can look to the consequences of RomneyCare in Massachusetts--the model for ObamaCare--as a preview of the near future. Massachusetts now has the highest insurance premiums in the country. The figures are quite staggering. A new study finds that "the average Massachusetts family health plan had a premium of $16,953 in 2011." One small business owner reports that "health-care benefits account for a quarter of the cost of hiring a new person." Even more startling is that this is an increase of 72% from 2003--nearly a doubling of insurance premiums in ten years.

As one expert explains, "Massachusetts is a state with a lot of mandates for coverage which other states may not have," and the report concludes that "The discrepancy will decrease once the Affordable Care Act is implemented." The discrepancy will decrease, not because Massachusetts premiums will go down, but because premiums for everyone else will go up to match them.

The rising premiums are bad enough in themselves, but they raise the prospect of crashing the whole structure of the health insurance system created by ObamaCare. Philip Klein explains:

"Should premiums continue to rise, more and more uninsured Americans are going to choose to pay the penalty rather than purchase expensive insurance. And those who go without insurance are more likely to be the ones who can afford to do so--young and healthy Americans with limited medical expenses. Should this occur, insurers would have to raise premiums even more to subsidize the expenses of the sicker beneficiaries they must cover under the law. This, in turn, would cause additional people to forgo insurance and pay the fine. And so on. This is known in the health care policy community as the 'death spiral' and it's one of the biggest threats to the structure of Obamacare."

Another article which cites many of the same problems I have just described marvels that "The congressional Democrats who crafted the legislation ignored virtually every actuarial principle governing rational insurance pricing."

But I don't think that's any kind of mystery. The consequences of ObamaCare--particularly the built-in "death spiral"--are so predictable that I don't think the legislation's architects can profess innocence. From the beginning, I have had suspicions, so to speak, that a stable health insurance industry was not the goal of ObamaCare. Rather, I warned: "It is an attempt to turn health insurance into what the left really wants: another welfare program in which everyone is entitled to free benefits, mandated by the government."

"But this would wreck private health insurance, making the whole industry financially unsustainable....

"This bill so comprehensively wrecks private health insurance that pretty soon a 'public option' will seem like the only alternative, and they will already have put into place one of the new taxes needed to pay for it. If the left's goal is to impose socialized medicine in America, this bill does it in the most callous and destructive way possible. It smashes private health care--then leaves us stranded in the rubble, at which point we will be expected to come crawling back to the same people who caused the disaster and ask them to save us."

The first half of our predictions from 2009 are already coming true. I am afraid that we're going to have to come back in another few years, after the second half has come to fruition, and say once again: we told you so.

Socialized medicine in the crown jewel of socialism… giving government control of every aspect of our lives, and ObamaCare is socialized medicine and Obama and his team are Progressives!  And remember: Progressivism = Socialism = Fascism = Marxism = Communism.  ObamaCare, like gun control, is not about healthcare (or safety), its all about control… The Obama agenda is all about control… controlling us, the masses and their minds. And when you watch the worship going on… by the entertainment, advertising and news media) and then talk to people who depend on them for all their information, you can see it is working!

The passing of ObamaCare was one of our major liberty or tyranny choice moments. And although much of the truth about ObamaCare surfaced and was available for those who did their homework, the powers that be forced this on the American people without even giving Congress the opportunity to adequately read the bill. Rationing, mandate committees & rationing panels, death panels (primarily for seniors and special needs children and adults) and the Complete Lives System are all part of this bill as well as higher taxes and fees, less healthcare and treatment choices, less freedom, and the control of at least 1/6 of the American economy by the U.S. government (and look whole they have done with our Social Security money) are all part of this bill plus a lot of surprises related to the IRS, guns and taking your freedom.  The warnings from people like Betsy McCaughey, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Michele Bachmann, Sean Hannity, Rick Santorum, Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Mark Steyn, Judge David Kithil of Marble Falls Texas, scores of doctors, and the list goes on were 100% right on the mark.

Related:

States’ refusal to establish exchanges could undo Obamacare

Republican governors decide against setting up ObamaCare insurance markets

Top Five Worst Obamacare Taxes Coming in 2013

ObamaCare Disarray as 2013 Nears… Beware!

ObamaCare Summed Up in One Sentence

Denny’s to charge 5% ‘Obamacare surcharge’ and cut employee hours to deal with cost of legislation

Will Sick Babies Be Starved to Death Under Obamacare?

GAO Report: White House Intentionally Delayed Obamacare’s Cuts To Medicaid Until After 2012 Election…

Strassel: Axelrod’s ObamaCare Dollars

All Americans Will Receive a Microchip Implant in 2013 Per ObamaCare – Updated

RFID Chip for all Americans in 2013 as Part of ObamaCare… See Biden Telling Fed Judge He Will Have to Rule on Implanted Microchips

Obamacare Has Literally Replaced the Constitution

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Death Panels are HERE

The Grouch of Right Truth

Today while working my shift in the emergency room, an old lady was brought in very sick and in fact near death. I did my usual workup and evaluation and attempted to administer life saving treatment. It was my plan to admit this woman to the hospital. I found out a little later that this same woman had been a patient here just slightly more than 2 weeks ago with a DIFFERENT DIAGNOSIS. I was told that if this woman was admitted, the hospital would not be paid.

The new Medicare rule now is that if the same Medicare patient is re-admitted to the hospital within 30 days, the hospital will not be paid. When they first started this nonsense they said this only applied to patients with the same diagnosis. Now they have "expanded" the rule to include re-admissions for any reason. So if you're in the hospital for pneumonia, and 3 weeks later, you break your leg.......too bad. Medicare will not pay the hospital to fix your leg.

A little later a man was brought in by ambulance, very sick, in pain, and near death. I did my usual evaluation and treatment, doing my best to ease pain and stabilize this man's illness. He needed to be admitted. To my chagrin I found out that he had been treated for the SAME problem at a DIFFERENT HOSPITAL about 10 days prior. If I admitted this man, our hospital would be paid nothing. I admitted the man.

My friends I am caught in a terrible position. I could have given treatment to both of these people and sent them out. There is no doubt that both of them would have died. Oh, I could also be sued for malpractice, but nobody cares about that. That's why we have insurance, right?

My other choice is to admit the person, knowing full well that the hospital will have to absorb the cost of care without hope of remuneration.

This is the climate we as healthcare providers find ourselves in today. How many small and struggling hospitals will survive under such ludicrous payment schemes? Indeed many facilities will close their doors. Many doctors will retire early or simply go do something else. As more and more are added to the Obamacare rolls, there will be less and less access. People will get sicker and yes, people will die because of it.

I had a sick and sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach today after both of these incidents. We have a good hospital. Our nurses, technicians, and support staff work very hard and they deserve to be paid for their efforts. I am not so worried about myself as I am near retirement, but I worry for all the younger folks in the healthcare business and I worry about our seniors who are in the long run going to be sacrificed as the government implements cost cutting shenanigans to cover up their broken promise made way back in 1964.

Folks, this is a nightmare!

Related:

On the Road to Death Panels

ObamaCare for Seniors: Sorry, You're Just Not Worth It

“Death Panel” Three Years Later

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

Obamacare rationing panels an ‘immediate danger to seniors’: former AMA president

“Death Panel” Three Years Later

The Bilderberg Group’s Connection To Everything In The World – Updated

People of Faith

Obama Regulation Czar, Cass Sunstein, Advocated Removing People’s Organs Without Explicit Consent

Obama’s "Science Czar" Advocates De-Developing the US to World of Zero Growth

Video: More Scary Stuff From Obama’s Science Czar

Holdren Says Constitution Backs Compulsory Abortion

Holdren: Seize Babies Born to Unwed Women

List of Obama’s Czars Plus Two – Updated: 8.18.09 – Remember when the Czars were the hot topic… but they overwhelmed us and forgot them to do they scary dirty jobs…

Science Czar John P. Holdren – Updated 9.2.09

Meet Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel: Deny Coverage to Elderly an Disabled for the Greater Good – But don’t forget… Sarah Palin was crazy…

Complete Lives System by Ezekial Emanuel

ObamaCare… the Kiss of Death - Collection of OBAMA SCARE - Articles U CAN NOT MISS!

Obama Embraces 'Death Panel' Concept in Medicare Rule

Obamacare to Herd Disabled Seniors to Bare-Bones Medicaid Plans

"People 70 and over will not be treated under Obamacare… and you thought DEATH PANELS were gone"– Updated

Soylent Green Anyone???

Great Grandmother Mary Allen Hardison: 101-Year-Old Woman Breaks Guinness World Record... Oldest Female to Paraglide Tandem

Go Granny Go!!

Seniors Left Behind?

The 'kill granny' bill

The Return of Mediscare

Checkout: ObamaCare Survival Guide

Sunday, October 14, 2012

On the Road to Death Panels

Star Parker: “America's 'soulless materialism,' declining birthrate leading to disaster”

WND: With the first presidential debate and the only vice-presidential debate behind us, it seems pretty clear that so-called “social issues” are not going to get much attention in this year’s presidential politics.

It’s unfortunate, I think. We deceive ourselves to permit the assumption that values and behavior are not the real drivers behind our economic problems.

The fiscal crisis of our entitlement programs is the direct result of these values and behavior.

The fiscal soundness of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is rooted in the assumption that those working can fund the needs of our elderly through payroll taxes. In the case of Social Security, we’re talking about retirement income. In the case of Medicare, we’re talking about health costs of the aged, and, Medicaid, long-term care of low income elderly.

When these programs were founded, the approach of using payroll taxes to fund care for our elderly seemed like a viable idea.

The bottom has fallen out, however, because of changes in our behavior. There are fewer and fewer workers per retiree as result of longer life spans and a shrinking workforce.

In 1950, there were 16 working Americans for every retiree. Today, there are less than three. According to projections, by 2030 there will be less than two.

It doesn’t take a supercomputer to realize that if we don’t reduce the retirement and health care resources available to our elderly, the burden on each working American to provide those resources increases substantially when they must be provided for each retiree by two, rather than 16, workers.

Yet the discussion about this crisis is 100 percent focused on how to cut the spending, and zero attention is spent on restoration of values that could rebuild families, produce more children and stop destroying the unborn.

According to a new report just out from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the overall fertility rate of American women – defined by the number of births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44 – is the lowest ever recorded since the government started gathering this information.

According to demographers, a fertility rate of 2.1 is necessary to keep a population at a steady state – which means that the overall population remains the same size over time. The 2.1 rate means that each adult woman produces 2.1 children on average over her lifetime.

After years of the U.S. fertility rate hovering slightly above 2.1, it has now dropped below to 1.9. That means the overall U.S. population is shrinking.

We generally look to Europe to see low fertility rates and shrinking populations. However, according to the Economist magazine, the U.S., at 1.9, now has a fertility rate lower than France, whose fertility rate stands at 2.0.

A change in prevailing values could reverse this trend. But the opposite is happening.

According to a new Gallup poll, for the first time most Americans feel that government should not promote any particular set of values.

In 1993, the first year Gallup did this annual survey, 53 percent said government should promote traditional values and 42 percent said that no particular set of values should be promoted. Now, in this latest survey, it is the opposite. Fifty-two percent say no particular set of values should be promoted, and 44 percent say government should promote traditional values.

With no rebirth of traditional values that could lead to more babies, caring for our elderly will become an increasingly onerous burden. Where can this soulless materialism lead?

In a recent New York Times op-ed, New York investment banker and former counselor to the Treasury secretary in the Obama administration Steven Rattner provides a shockingly candid answer.

The op-ed begins, “We need death panels.”

Rattner then qualifies this by saying, well, maybe not “exactly.”

But he then concludes with, “We may shrink from … stomach-wrenching choices, but they are inescapable.”

Star Parker is the author of Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do About It, Revised and Updated Edition, Pimps, Whores and Welfare Brats: From Welfare Cheat to Conservative Messenger and White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay

Related:

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

Obamacare rationing panels an ‘immediate danger to seniors’: former AMA president

“Death Panel” Three Years Later

The Bilderberg Group’s Connection To Everything In The World – Updated

People of Faith

Obama Regulation Czar, Cass Sunstein, Advocated Removing People’s Organs Without Explicit Consent

Obama’s "Science Czar" Advocates De-Developing the US to World of Zero Growth

Video: More Scary Stuff From Obama’s Science Czar

Holdren Says Constitution Backs Compulsory Abortion

Holdren: Seize Babies Born to Unwed Women

List of Obama’s Czars Plus Two – Updated: 8.18.09 – Remember when the Czars were the hot topic… but they overwhelmed us and forgot them to do they scary dirty jobs…

Science Czar John P. Holdren – Updated 9.2.09

Meet Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel: Deny Coverage to Elderly an Disabled for the Greater Good – But don’t forget… Sarah Palin was crazy…

Complete Lives System by Ezekial Emanuel

Checkout: ObamaCare Survival Guide

Friday, October 5, 2012

ObamaCare… the Kiss of Death - Collection of OBAMA SCARE - Articles U CAN NOT MISS!

1. Medical Rationing and the Demise of Patient Confidentiality

2. Obama adviser admits: 'We need death panels'

A top Democrat strategist and donor who served as an adviser to President Obama recently conceded that the rationing of heath services under Obamacare is "inevitable."

3. Hospitals face fines over too many readmitted Medicare patients

Originally Posted: October 1, 2012

4. ObamaCare: The Kiss of Death  -  By J.T. Hatter

Obama Speech to Congress, September 9, 2009

Obama Lied: Health Care Died

In 2009, Obama addressed a joint session of Congress to lay out his program for health care. He unflinchingly told the assembled elected officials one whopper after another, amid a rising chorus of boos and loud grumbling. It got to be too much for Congressman Joe Wilson, of South Carolina, who shouted, "You lie!" to the president as the latter was speaking. Both political parties roundly condemned Wilson for his outburst. He was called a racist, of course, among other things, and he later apologized for his indiscretion. But Joe Wilson was right on the money.

Video:  Rep Joe Wilson… You Lie – Remember this?

Obama lied to the American people when he said that under ObamaCare, the cost for health care would not go up. He said that the middle class would not spend "a single dime" in increased taxes to pay for it, that ObamaCare would actually reduce the federal deficit by the cost savings it would create, that you could keep your current doctor, and that 30 million more people would have health care coverage. None of this was true. And Obama knew that when he made all these claims.

The facts are that Obama and his Democratic Party comrades fudged the numbers, engaged in enormously fraudulent accounting tricks, double-counted Medicare funds, dissembled about what ObamaCare would really entail ("We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."), and completely misinformed Congress and the public about the scope and impact of these new laws and entitlement programs.

But now the facts are beginning to roll in, and the Democrats' health care chickens are coming home to roost. When Obama campaigned in 2008, he said he would reduce health care premiums for families by $2,500 in his first term. The Kaiser Family Foundation reports that annual average family insurance premiums have gone up by $2,730 in Obama's first term -- not down. Kaiser currently reports that health premium costs increased 4% this year alone.

Obama told the American people that his health care program would cost "only" 940 billion dollars over ten years. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) now has rescored ObamaCare and says that the program's gross cost is $1.762 trillion from now to FY 2022. This estimate does not include administrative and other costs, which will add hundreds of billions of dollars more.

The CBO estimate suggests that an offsetting cost reduction of about 0.51 trillion dollars would be realized from receipts from "penalty payments," fees, and increased taxes. According to Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, these "penalty payments" are actually taxes. There are twenty new taxes in ObamaCare. Yes, Obama lied about our taxes going up. ObamaCare may be the biggest and most expensive lie told in American history.

Seniors Hurt the Worst

The Romney camp is getting a lot of mileage about the damage ObamaCare does to health care for seniors. Look for Florida to get a blitz campaign on this message. The fact is that senior citizens stand to lose the most from ObamaCare.

Obama and the Democrats robbed 716 billion dollars from Medicare to pay part of the cost of ObamaCare. This severely damaged the Medicare Advantage (MA) program, among others. The MA program allows seniors to receive medical coverage through private insurance plans of their choosing. One of the main thrusts of ObamaCare is to debilitate and eventually eliminate the private health insurance industry. The Democrats' first prize of battle is the MA program, which the Heritage Foundation says will lose an average of $3,714's worth of annual benefits. They expect that ObamaCare will cut MA program enrollment by 50% by 2017. Let me repeat that: ObamaCare will cut MA enrollment by half and reduce benefits for those who can remain in MA. I can't see seniors standing for this.

ObamaCare cuts payments to health care providers and will cause an estimated 15% of Medicare Part A providers to become unprofitable in the next decade. The Heritage Foundation cites the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) on this subject as follows:

Over time, a sustained reduction in payment updates, based on productivity expectations that are difficult to attain, would cause Medicare payment rates to grow more slowly than, and in a way that was unrelated to, the providers' cost of furnishing services to beneficiaries.

ObamaCare is designed to run not only private insurance companies, but also doctors and hospitals out of business.

But the ObamaCare assault on seniors doesn't stop there. ObamaCare places a 2.3% excise tax on medical devices and a 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned investment income. Older folks use more medical devices and have more investment income, so these new taxes hurt them directly.

ObamaCare imposes a tax, disguised as a "fee," on brand-name drugs in Medicare and other government programs. Obama has also imposed a new federal excise tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans the Democrats don't like. The 40% tax is designed to make the premium plans unaffordable to those willing to pay for them, and to punish the wealthy who want them at any cost. ObamaCare beats down seniors in many other ways, and yes, there are death panels -- which will result in health care rationing and worse.

Senior citizens will suffer the most from ObamaCare. However, seniors made up 16% of the electorate in 2008 and went for McCain by 53% to 47%. The Democratic Party regards seniors as "underperformers" in 2008 and is desperately wooing them this year. Seniors currently represent 21% of the vote, and they're not happy with Obama -- for good reason. Wait 'til the Democrats get a peek at the senior vote in 2012.

11_image001

Your New Health Care System
Chart Prepared by the Senate Joint Economic Committee

Health Care Battlegrounds

ObamaCare expands Medicaid, which is a poorly performing, bankrupt federal program that is in severe need of reform and cutting. The Democrats targeted the poor for roughly half of the thirty million uninsured people they said would receive health care coverage under their plan.

Medicaid currently provides for sixty million "poor" people. Obama wants to add 15+ million more. But states are balking at the budget-busting expense for their share of the expanded Medicaid program. And the Supreme Court recently ruled that the federal government couldn't use financial penalties to force the states to comply with Medicaid Expansion requirements. This is a devastating blow to the entire ObamaCare scheme.

At least 13 states have said that they may opt out of the Medicaid program for new patients, and about 20 states are inclined against Medicaid expansion. HealthDay offers this observation,

"I look at the states as the next critical battleground," said Robert Doherty, the American College of Physicians' senior vice president for governmental affairs and public policy. If some states decline to extend Medicaid, the nation will end up with coverage like "Swiss cheese" with holes for "the poorest of the poor," he said.

Obama has created more than just a Medicaid health care battleground in the USA. When Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding vote upholding most of ObamaCare, it meant that states were supposed to immediately set up the American Benefits Health Exchanges. These health care exchanges are the principle implementing conduit of the law, and they provide the means through which the American people and small businesses will be forced to purchase their federally subsidized and managed health care plans. But what if states refuse to set up these insurance exchanges?

About a dozen states have said they're not going to set up the American Benefits Health Exchanges required under ObamaCare. The federal government has responded by saying that it will come into the states and set up the exchanges if the state governments won't set them up. The Kaiser Family Foundation blithely describes it this way:

If a state fails to set up an Exchange by January 1, 2014, the DHHS Secretary will establish and operate an Exchange in the state, either directly or through an agreement with a nonprofit entity.

Over half the states sued the federal government to stop ObamaCare, saying it was unconstitutional. We lost. And now we have states suing the federal government over implementation requirements, including the insurance exchanges. About half the states are pursuing the requirements for setting up the exchanges. Kathleen Sebelius, the HHS administrator, has admitted that there isn't enough money to set up the exchanges and has gone back to Congress with a request for another billion dollars to get the exchanges rolling. But the House of Representatives isn't coughing up the money. Michael Cannon at the CATO blog says the ObamaCare exchanges just aren't happening.

The battle continues. What an unbelievable mess Obama has made of the American health care system. ObamaCare has created legal battlegrounds all over the country. Several states have passed laws providing that their citizens cannot be required to purchase federal health insurance. Some states are suing over implementation provisions.

Once states start to opt out of the Medicaid Expansion, and refuse to set up or participate in the exchanges, the federal government's only option is to sue the states to force compliance or set up offices in the states and run the programs from Washington. Attorney General Eric Holder and Administrator Kathleen Sebelius will be glad to do this. But will they be around in 2013?

12_image002

Image by Newsbusters

ObamaCare: The Kiss of Death

Obama has failed miserably. He has created a gargantuan abomination of a new federal entitlement program that we can't afford and that won't work. The only certain outcome of ObamaCare is that it will destroy the best health care system in the world.

"ObamaCare Summed Up In One Sentence" is a video of Dr. Barbara Bellar brilliantly dissecting what is wrong with ObamaCare. This video has gone viral across the nation because it resonates with the 65% of Americans who don't want anything to do with ObamaCare.

Video: ObamaCare Summed Up in One Sentence

ObamaCare is blatantly unconstitutional, no matter what John Roberts thinks, and the American people instinctively know this. After the passage of ObamaCare, our government can force us to do anything. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the concept of sovereign states' rights have been thrown out the window. We no longer have constitutional government, nor are we ruled by the consent of the governed. We have an elite ruling class that can legally make us do anything -- thanks to Obama and Justice Roberts.

It isn't merely the cost of the outrageous government takeover of one fifth of the American economy that rankles. It isn't just the fact that ObamaCare is going to take the best health care system in the world and run it into the ground that angers Americans. Obama has engineered a law that gives our government the absolute right to rule every aspect of our lives. Just like they do in communist nations.

Socialist revolutionaries understand that a universal health care system run by the central government is the essential key to transforming the United States into a socialist nation. This has been Obama's true objective all along.

ObamaCare is the kiss of death to democracy, liberty and freedom, and the high-quality health care we have enjoyed in the USA. The main issue in this presidential election campaign isn't about health care or jobs: it's about freedom vs. socialism.

A vote against Obama, and for Romney, is a vote to save health care in America. But more importantly, it is also a vote to save America.

J.T. Hatter is the author of Lost in Zombieland: The Rise of President Zero, a political satire on the Obama administration. JT can be reached at jt@jthatter.com.

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

“Death Panel” Three Years Later

by Sarah Palin on Monday, June 25, 2012 at 11:11am – on Facebook

Sarah Palin Gallup Photo

As we wait for the impending Supreme Court decision on Obamacare, I reiterate what I wrote in my first post on this topic nearly three years ago. I stand by everything I wrote in that warning to my fellow Americans because what was true then is true now, and it will remain true as we hear what the Supreme Court has to say.

It was a pretty long post, but a lot of people seem to have only read two words of it: “death panel.” Though I was called a liar for calling it like it is, many of these accusers finally saw that Obamacare did in fact create a panel of faceless bureaucrats who have the power to make life and death decisions about health care funding. It’s called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), and its purpose all along has been to “keep costs down” by actually denying care via price controls and typically inefficient bureaucracy. This subjective rationing of care is what I was writing about in that first post:

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.

Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives. I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors.

We must step up and engage in this most crucial debate. Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back. Ronald Reagan once wrote, “Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Let’s stop and think and make our voices heard before it’s too late.

If the Supreme Court doesn’t strike down Obamacare entirely, then Congress must act to repeal IPAB and Obamacare before it is indeed “too late.” All of Obamacare must go one way or another.

- Sarah Palin

Related:

Obamacare Has Literally Replaced the Constitution

Obamacare to Herd Disabled Seniors to Bare-Bones Medicaid Plans

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

Eugenics In Action: 3 Year Old Girl Denied Kidney Transplant …

"People 70 and over will not be treated under Obamacare… and you thought DEATH PANELS were gone"

Dirty Little Secret: Rationing is at Heart of ObamaCare

Obama “Fixed” Medicare…With Rationing

FYI: Every American Concerned With Health Care Needs To Read This Conversation

UPROAR OVER OBAMACARE‘S ’RATIONING PANELS’ INTENSIFIES

Obama Embraces 'Death Panel' Concept in Medicare Rule

ObamaCare and me – Doctor Zane F. Pollard, MD – For Anyone Who Still Doesn’t Believe in Rationing and Death Panels if ObamaCare Passes

Life With Trig: Sarah Palin on Raising a Special-Needs Child

Soylent Green Anyone???