Obama's Health Plan

[ageofknowledge]

Just heard his speech today. I approve of the direction he is taking.

[zoegirl]

I certainly don't. I work for a small school and I worry that they would drop our insurance.

In principle, I do not want the Government in my medical decisions. I dont want to give Governemnt more control. Umm...the is the government, that manages to create more beaurocracy in any program?

In practice, it plain won't work.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OG ... wMGQ=#more


Massachusetts has tried this...
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editor ... lls_short/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07 ... omney-bid/


http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2009 ... care-cuts/

Sweden has between 60-70% tax rate...do we really think ours won't go up?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... edens-way/

Britain and Canada?

http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/content/ ... =7&cxcat=7

I would worry....no that reforms don't need to be made but this won't fix the problems.

THese Countries mentioned above are now exploring how to privatize...

My nurse who gives me my Remicade is staunchly aginst this and no healthcare proessional so far among my aquaintance likes it.

The sad thing is, he doesn't seem to be aware of his own bill
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/21/mor ... ouse-bill/

[ageofknowledge]

Obama's plan http://www.healthreform.gov/ will work. It's much better than Australias, England's, or Canada's plan (both of which do work to a large extent and do serve their populations despite much needed reforms) and I can hardly wait for it to be implemented and the millions of people like myself that worked for 25 years and then were kicked to the curb right as the recession took hold and ate up our 401ks and all of our savings until we couldn't afford medical insurance anymore then were hit by a serious medical condition that left us partially disabeled (no benefits for that friend) and headed toward permanent deformity and crippledness can finally get health care so that doesn't happen. One terrible blow after another after another. I celebrate it and to me it sounds like Obama is on the right track. I can hardly wait to see a doctor under Obama's new plan to save my body and restore my ability to earn before it ends up as a permanent disability (which is far more expensive in the end).

My life and eventual physical restoration can be saved because of Obama's plan and there are millions and millions and millions of citizens just like me out here. Sure we realize there are plenty of Christian right wing conservatives that want an every person for themself system and we used to think like them once unfortunately. But our experience changed us. And yes we paid our fair share of taxes for decades before entering into that no man's land between the life we knew and permanent disability (which could be avoided with proper medical care). You make it sound like all federal government is bad. It isn't. Government tyranny is bad, not health care for needy Americans. The right wing can't tell the difference. They say it's all bad but then they enroll on SS and Medicare as soon as they are eligible.. lol.

When I get my restoration and God's frown over my life finally changes to a smile again someday: I will happily pay my taxes so that Americans can have some basic medical care. This has certainly changed my view on the issue and Obama is moving smartly forward on it.

[cslewislover]

I'll have to check out those links, as I only read a little bit a while ago about he planned. What I had read, it was inbetween total social health care, and total private.

I do think something needs to be done, since more and more people don't have health care. Just leaving it be doesn't seem to be doing anyone any good, and if something was done, maybe more hospitals and emergency rooms would open and reopen in our region. It's pretty ridiculous, was has happened here. Many emergency rooms closed because they could no longer afford to treat so many people that weren't paying. But some of this, at least, has to do with noncitizens. I wonder how that will be dealt with.

[zoegirl]

I totsaly agree with reform being necessary, I don't believe that Obama's plan will solve the complaints that are usually estalished as the problem: high costs, rejection, poor healthcare...

We need tort reform, the ability to pay for ourselves, removing the issue of pre-existing conditions....

[Jac3510]

AoK, you do realize that under Obama's plan

1. Your taxes are going up dramatically;
2. We accumulate another trillion in debt over 10 years;
3. We end up rationing health care;
4. Your wait at the doctor will be much longer, because the same or fewer doctors will see less patients;
5. Senior citizens will suffer the most, since the primary way congress wants to pay for this mess is to cut Medicare. In fact, the bulk of Medicare payments come from four procedures: hip replacements, knee replacements, angio-bypass surgery, and one other that escapes my memory right now. Those are the procedures that make senior citizens be able to live normal lives, and those procedures are the ones that Obama's appointed health officials have already said they would dramatically cut;
6. Private businesses would be forced to lay off more people because they could not afford the mandate to pay for the health insurace of everyone;
7. Private health insurance companies would go out of business, causing more job losses, because they would not be able to compete with the government run program;
8. You would have a government official telling you what you could and could not have done at the doctor.

It's a terrible plan. If you want real health care reform, encourage tort reform, portability of healthcare, and policies that focus on prevention rather than intervention. All of these will reduce the cost of health care DRAMATICALLY, which means everyone--even people in your situation--will be able to get care. But under Obama's plan, you are cutting your own throat, because they very people who need healthcare the most--people like you--are the ones who WILL NOT get it because YOUR coverage is the most expensive.

Think about it this way: if EVERYONE is covered by the gov't, and the gov't only has a limitd supply of money to pay for health insurance, then whose procedures are they going to pay for? Answer: the cheapest. That's why you ALWAYS have rationed healthcare in these situations, and since your care is the most expensive, it's people like you, not me, who lose out. The government will tell the doc not to treat your serious problems so that they can pay for my annual checkup. Is that what you want? Because that's what Obama is offering.

[Byblos]

Add point 9. Businesses who will drop their subsidies of employee health plans because there's a supposed cheaper alternative. So many of those that are currently privately insured will end up at the government's door and mercy. This is a behemoth doomed to fail in the most fantastic way, by sidling our children and their children with unpayable debt and bazaar-type health care.

[cslewislover]

I have Kaiser right now, and I really like them (mind you, they aren't perfect about covering everyone they should). They are nonprofit and SO MUCH better than the for-profit groups I belonged to before that were within HMO groups. Kaiser costs less per month, too. I have two sister-in-laws who are nurses, and the system as it is now is not wonderful. I don't know what the answers are to this complicated mess we're in, but I think things could and should be better. I just don't think it's useful to say Obama or whoever is wrong, without providing other competitive ideas. And Jac, you have. The thing is, why weren't these enacted before, then? Related to my experience Kaiser (and knowing that some of the best hospitals are also nonprofit), if more (or all) medical related enterprises were nonprofit, that might make things a lot better right there (maybe not research - don't know about that); I'm not sure, but it seems so.

[zoegirl]

Obama's plan http://www.healthreform.gov/ will work. It's much better than Australias, England's, or Canada's plan (both of which do work to a large extent and do serve their populations despite much needed reforms) and I can hardly wait for it to be implemented and the millions of people like myself that worked for 25 years and then were kicked to the curb right as the recession took hold and ate up our 401ks and all of our savings until we couldn't afford medical insurance anymore then were hit by a serious medical condition that left us partially disabeled (no benefits for that friend) and headed toward permanent deformity and crippledness can finally get health care so that doesn't happen. One terrible blow after another after another. I celebrate it and to me it sounds like Obama is on the right track. I can hardly wait to see a doctor under Obama's new plan to save my body and restore my ability to earn before it ends up as a permanent disability (which is far more expensive in the end).

My life and eventual physical restoration can be saved because of Obama's plan and there are millions and millions and millions of citizens just like me out here. Sure we realize there are plenty of Christian right wing conservatives that want an every person for themself system and we used to think like them once unfortunately. But our experience changed us. And yes we paid our fair share of taxes for decades before entering into that no man's land between the life we knew and permanent disability (which could be avoided with proper medical care). You make it sound like all federal government is bad. It isn't. Government tyranny is bad, not health care for needy Americans. The right wing can't tell the difference. They say it's all bad but then they enroll on SS and Medicare as soon as they are eligible.. lol.

When I get my restoration and God's frown over my life finally changes to a smile again someday: I will happily pay my taxes so that Americans can have some basic medical care. This has certainly changed my view on the issue and Obama is moving smartly forward on it.

http://www.humira.com/Global/FinancialH ... Z130309HHR

http://www.patientassistance.com/profile/abbott-22/

AoK,
hERE ARE two sites for patient assistance programs for those that are uninssured for Humira, a good biologic treament for arthritis.

There is one a well for Remicade, which I posted on your prayer requests thread.

Both of these are very very promising for arthritis and most feel the affects within weeks of the treatments. This can certainly help you get bac on your fee where you can be back working again.

BTW, some hidden problems n the health care bill
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... zfDxfbwhzs

THE SCARIEST!!?!?!?

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

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.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor's decisions (442, 446). 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.”

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

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.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle's book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. 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.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle's book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration's economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration's health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.
The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation's gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.

(Betsy McCaughey is former lieutenant governor of New York and is an adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. The opinions expressed are her own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Betsy McCaughey at

NOT WHAT I WANT....!!!

[Jac3510]

Oh, and let's add to all of this that it funds abortion on demand.

[zoegirl]

Yeah, and remove the conscious clause fo helathcare providers and abortions

[rodyshusband]

What concerns me is not related to his actual plan, but his insistence that it be passed and implemented without discussion. He seems outraged that anyone should even question his ideas. Perhaps Mr. Obama actually believes he is infallible, as the media has insisted since the elections.

[ageofknowledge]

AoK, you do realize that under Obama's plan

1. Your taxes are going up dramatically: I disagree with your assertion. But even if they did, I personally look forward to being healthy enough to work once again and pay them rather than slide to a permanent disability and end up on SSDI for life costing everyone else to pay higher taxes which is happening to millions and millions of Americans right now exactly this predicament.
2. We accumulate another trillion in debt over 10 years: No. That number is more than offset by a healthier population than can work and pay taxes and stay off permanent disability because they had no medical care.
3. We end up rationing health care: So we can have medical care? Excellent. Beats being left to die in the street or materially under insured while the fortunate few get access to high end treatment on demand.
4. Your wait at the doctor will be much longer, because the same or fewer doctors will see less patients: It will take time to allow the 47 million Americans suffering without any medical care to integrate and the requisite number of Doctors and nurses needed to come to market true. It's a temporary problem, however.
5. Senior citizens will suffer the most, since the primary way congress wants to pay for this mess is to cut Medicare. In fact, the bulk of Medicare payments come from four procedures: hip replacements, knee replacements, angio-bypass surgery, and one other that escapes my memory right now. Those are the procedures that make senior citizens be able to live normal lives, and those procedures are the ones that Obama's appointed health officials have already said they would dramatically cut: Medicare needs to be reformed or the stats shows it will consume 60% of the budget if something isn't done in the not too distant future and that's unsustainable. Actually the high cost of medical care in general in this country needs to be addressed. If we did nothing, medical costs would continue to rise three times faster than salaries leaving more and more Americans without medical care alltogether. In the end, the system crashes anyways.
6. Private businesses would be forced to lay off more people because they could not afford the mandate to pay for the health insurace of everyone: A lot needs to be done to allow private business to operate profitably and effectively in this country. Denying health care; however, doesn't need to be one of them.
7. Private health insurance companies would go out of business, causing more job losses, because they would not be able to compete with the government run program: As a licensed life and disability agent who is uninsurable under their system I say "good riddance" to the waste, the tragedy of leaving 47 million Americans to twist in the wind, an unsustainable system whose costs rise three times faster than compensation, etc.. etc.. etc...
8. You would have a government official telling you what you could and could not have done at the doctor: I could see a doctor? Cool. A real improvement.

It's a great plan. Real heath care reform is about lowering medical costs and offering cheaper alternatives, streamlined patient care and reduction of redundancy, etc... Obama is offering all of that and more and this idea that your taxes are going to double is a wives fable being propigated by Republicans for personal gain. I'm glad I left the Republican party after a lifetime of supporting it a couple of years ago. It's the party of hypocrisy. I joined the American Independent Party http://www.aipca.org/ and we want what he is offering.

[ageofknowledge]

What concerns me is not related to his actual plan, but his insistence that it be passed and implemented without discussion. He seems outraged that anyone should even question his ideas. Perhaps Mr. Obama actually believes he is infallible, as the media has insisted since the elections.

He's outraged because he's receiving letters from people all over the country who are going bankrupt and dying due to the high cost of or their inability to obtain medical care. And your strawman personal attacks on President Obama don't help your argument imo.

[ageofknowledge]

Oh, and let's add to all of this that it funds abortion on demand.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

^ There are the ugly statistics. "Nearly half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and four in 10 of these are terminated by abortion.[1] Twenty-two percent of all pregnancies (excluding miscarriages) end in abortion.[2]."

That's happening now. Do you honestly think that not providing medical care to uninsured Americans, leaving them to twist in the wind, is going to stop abortion in this country? I don't.

If you want to stop the abortion holocaust, you'll have to find a way to convince your fellow Americans to stop it. Simply withholding medical care isn't working now.