Sunday, 14 June 2009
Murder by Bureaucracy

COMMENT:  To be forewarned is to be forearmed. You received some good information yesterday and as you receive additional information you will want to be attentive and Arm Yourself for the Coming Battle Against Government-Run Health Care.

United States Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) will soon unveil his plan to institute a government-run, taxpayer-funded health care system. 
 
Please take a moment to view this hard-hitting TV ad warning about the dangers of implementing a government-run health care system.

By Peter Ferrara on 6.10.09 @ 6:09AM
Wise guy liberal talk show hosts and writers of impassioned letters to the editor have been lecturing me with the argument that Obama and his Democrats are not remotely planning any sort of government health-care rationing in their socialized medicine plan, which is going to save so much money that they are now scrounging around for the biggest tax increase in U.S. history to pay for it. But Obama has now made fools out of all of them with the release last week of his White House report, "The Economic Case for Health Care Reform" (.pdf), produced by his Council of Economic Advisors (CEA).
 
Read the document, and you will see that it envisions a complete government takeover of America's health care in great detail. Wise, all-knowing, government bureaucrats in Washington will identify exactly what health care in each locality in the entire country is waste, and eliminate it. They will determine whether the treatments and health care your doctor has prescribed for you are right, and the best of the alternatives, and they will control his practice through their payment policies and regulations, forcing him to follow what they in their all-knowing wisdom think is best. Worst of all, they will decide whether the health care your doctor thinks you need is "cost-effective," meaning they will decide whether the cost of your health care is worth it, to them.
 
Listen to Obama, and you will hear him say almost every day that his health reforms are going to save America and its economy by reducing health costs. The CEA report explains exactly how and why he is going to do that. They don't use the word, of course, but nevertheless it is all overwhelming, government, health-care rationing, meaning you and your doctor lose control and choice over your health care, and centralized, government bureaucrats in Washington decide what health care you get and when. Think about it, and you will realize that in the government-run system Obama envisions, there is no other way to achieve the cost reductions he is talking about than through extensive government health-care rationing, meaning denying you the health care you want.
 
Indeed, the CEA report says 30% of American health care is waste, which government bureaucracy is now going to eliminate. That is a lot of health care to deny you. Doctors and hospitals who don't think this downsizing is going to affect them, and their freedom to control and run their own practices, are whistling past the graveyard. Wake up, and you will realize that in Obama's Brave New World, you are going to be the targets, just like the bank executives are today.
 
The Government Doesn't, Can't, and Won't Know
The economists who wrote the CEA report on health-care reform start by assuming first that the government is omniscient. They don't say that, but that assumption jumps out of every line.
For example, the report says the government is going to sharply reduce health costs by
Looking systematically at what works and what doesn't in order to provide more high value care and less care that is of low value. For many types of medical conditions, a patient may have a choice of several methods or treatments, each having different benefits or risks. Systematic examinations of the merits of different treatments and dissemination of the results of these examinations to patients and providers is one mechanism for promoting high value health care.
You will notice in reading Obamaspeak on health policy a distinct lack of nouns. Just who is going to look systematically at what works and what doesn't? And just who is going to conduct those "systematic examinations of the merits of different treatments?" And will whoever that is really know what works and what doesn't for 300 million patients across America, and "the merits of different treatments"? The answer to the first two questions is a centralized government health-care bureaucracy in Washington. Intelligent readers might think the answer to the last question is "No," or maybe "Hell, no!" But the answer is really, "Of course not, wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late."
 
The CEA report says at the beginning that "up to 30 percent of health-care costs (or about 5 percent of GDP) could be saved without compromising health outcomes." Achieving that result to slash the federal deficit, increase GDP ultimately by 8%, and reduce unemployment is going to require a lot more than "dissemination of the results [of the above] examinations to patients and providers [as] one mechanism for promoting high value health care."
Read more here

"The Doctor Will See All of You Now"

by Phyllis Schlafly, December 12, 2008

You are sitting in a doctor's waiting room with eight other sick patients and the nurse announces: The doctor will see all of you now — at the same time. That's how the Boston Globe recently described shared visits that are being used to cope with the long waits now customary in Massachusetts.

Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama are planning that the new Democratic Congress's first order of business will be to extend the Massachusetts health-care mistake to all 50 states. Like other legislative rush-acts (i.e., the 2007 amnesty bill and the 2008 bailouts), details are currently withheld to avoid giving members of Congress and the public adequate time to analyze the bill before the vote is called.

If Kennedy succeeds in his goal of using the Massachusetts plan as a model for national health care, average Americans will no longer get immediate access to medical care. They will have the long waits and massive new taxpayer costs which the Massachusetts plan has produced.
 
Defending the practice of group visits, one doctor told the Boston Globe, "people came to me with similar complaints and I had these canned speeches." The doctor does not ask the patients to take off their clothes in front of the group; he makes do with less effective, fully-clothed examinations.
 
The group session consists mostly of hearing other people's complaints, while the doctor dishes out advice in front of all the patients. Privacy and modesty are gone, but you can pick up the germs of the other sick patients in the room with you.
 
One doctor observed that "this is not the type of medical care anyone with a modicum of intelligence would want." Is this the change Obama promised?
 
At Holyoke Health Center in Boston, patients wait four months simply to get an appointment. This causes some patients to go to costly emergency rooms for routine visits.
 
While emergency rooms are handling routine matters and taking medical histories, people who need urgent attention wait in line. In parts of western Massachusetts, which is non-urban like most of the United States, the wait has grown longer than one year just to get a physical.
 
The Massachusetts health-care plan is universal and mandatory. The Massachusetts plan also introduces other words into the health-care vocabulary such as group diagnosis, long waits, rationing, forced taxes, and high costs.
 
The Massachusetts plan forces people to buy insurance they do not want or need. Once they are compelled to pay for it, they naturally want something for their money, and that crowds out people who really need medical care.
 
The Massachusetts plan is a fiscal disaster, costing far more than estimated, with no end in sight. Massachusetts is wealthier than most states, but this plan threatens to bankrupt even it.
 
The Massachusetts plan forces people to buy insurance under threat of having to pay a penalty on their income tax return. Kennedy's staff has been quietly meeting with the insurance industry to make sure it will be just as happy with a national version of mandatory insurance as it is in Massachusetts.
 
Massachusetts politicians had promised voters not to worry about costs because the state would collect $95 million in fees in the first year from small businesses that do not insure their employees. But those fees were never collected because small businesses cannot afford this, and taxpayers are forced to ante up that shortfall.
 
Massachusetts taxpayers were not told that this plan forces public funding for abortion by anyone who wants one, not only the poor. Kennedy's plan will likely try to force Americans nationwide to pay for all abortions as the Massachusetts plan does, perhaps by regulations if not by statute.
 
Massachusetts medical care is beginning to look like Canada, where waiting lists, rationing, and travel to foreign countries for care have become the norm. Meanwhile, Members of Congress continue to enjoy special gold-plated health care not available to most Americans.
 
Former Senate Majority Leader Thomas Daschle, who is a high-paid health-care consultant for a lobbying firm, is expected to be appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services. He is holding town hall meetings this month to create the illusion of public support for the Kennedy plan.
As HHS Secretary, Daschle will write the regulatory details that Congress doesn't dare to put in the proposed statute. So much for Obama's promise to change Washington, eliminate the influence of lobbyists, and avoid conflicts of interest!
 
Obama is planning to use his giant campaign database to pressure Congress into speedy action. Americans will have to protest quickly if they want to prevent the mandatory and expensive Massachusetts plan from being forced on the country.

Posted on 06/14/2009 5:39 PM by Bobbie Patray