Obamacare = Rationing, Low Quality, Waiting

[Capitalist Patriot]

Here are some specifics on the rationing of health care...(the GPO PDF of the bill is linked at the bottom)
Following the recommendations of Peter Singer made in NYT’s Sunday magazine, it pays to take a look at what is actually in the healthcare bill.
It’s worse than you can possibly imagine. Somehow, it manages to be Singer on steroids. Who wrote this bill? It has Singer’s footprints all over it.
Peter Fleckstein (aka Fleckman) is reading it and has been posting on Twitter his findings. This is from his postings (Note: All comments are Fleckman’s)
Pg 22 of the Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
Pg 30 Sec 123 of bill – THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you receive.
Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill – YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED.
Pg 42 of HC Bill – The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your Health care Benefits for you. You have no choice in the decision.
PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill – Healthcare will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Pg 58 – Govt will have real-time access to individual finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued.
Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for direct funds transfers.
PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating a Healthcare Exchange to bring private healthc are plans under Govt control.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill – Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private Healthcare plans in the Exchange
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill – Specifics for Benefit Levels of Plans = The Government rations Healthcare based on cost benefits to government.
PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill – Govt mandates linguistic appropriation services or translation services for illegal aliens.
Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups like ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt Healthcare plan
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill – Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans. #AARP members – your Health care WILL be rationed.
PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill – Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid.
pg 124 lines 24-25 No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No “judicial review” allowed against Govt monopoly
pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill – Doctors/ AMA – The Govt will dictate what wage you are allowed to make. (Wage limits).
Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employers MUST enroll their employees into the public option plan. THEY HAVE NO CHOICE, and neither do the employees.
Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay premiums for every employee, part time employees AND their families as well.
Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll of $400,000 will have an 8% tax levied on all payroll.
pg 150 Lines 9-13 Employers with payroll between $251,000 & 400,000 who does not provide in full, the public option, will have a 6% tax on all payroll levied.
Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC coverage according to Govt mandate, will be taxed at 2.5% of their income for healthcare. So, you will have government healthcare coverage, or you will be punished.
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay)
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Administration (GOVT) will have total and complete access to ALL your personal financial, bank and investment information.
PG 203 Line 14-15 HC – “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax” Yes, it says that.
Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid, Seniors, low income, and poor.
Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill – Wages for all doctors will be made the same. Specialists like Brain Surgeons will make the same money a General Practitioner makes.
PG 253 Line 10-1
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf

[Capitalist Patriot]

Check out these stories from the UK:

“Patient promised knee operation within months had to wait a year” The Times, By Patrick Foster (June 7, 2007) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle1896222.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article1896222.ece)
Allan Lloyd
Allan Lloyd, from Hereford, said he traveled 7,000 miles to take his wife to a hospital in Cheltenham to receive her cancer treatment. It took 210 hours and cost £750 in petrol.

“Cancer patient, 87, forced to travel 500 miles a week” The Guardian, By Steven Morris (April 4, 2006) http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/ap...thandwellbeing (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/apr/04/health.healthandwellbeing)
Andrew Lawson
Andrew Lawson, a 48 year-old NHS doctor, was diagnosed with pulmonary mesothelioma. He said, “treatments are available now, but in parts of the UK the drug that is used as a frontline treatment is not available on the NHS. This is because for each year of (quality-adjusted) life it brings it costs more than £30,000. [If you are] diagnosed with a mesothelioma in Scotland, Australia and many European countries, you will receive the drug – but not in England.”

“My surreal side: doctor to patient” The Sunday Times, By Dr. Andrew Lawson (May 27, 2007) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1844501.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article1844501.ece)
Andrew Melville
Andrew Melville, 50, was refused the drug Tarceva by the NHS, despite being told by doctors it could prolong his life. The father-of-one died on February 11. Now Mr Melville’s sister, Pat Myatt, wants all patients refused drugs on the NHS to form an action group. Her aim is to take on the Government over the issue.

“Family vow to step up drugs fight” The Sentinel (UK), By Richard Ault (26 February 2008) http://www.thesentinel.co.uk/display...nodeId=158338… (http://www.thesentinel.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=158338…)
Christine Preuth
Christine Preuth, 72, of Keywood Avenue, a Sunbury pensioner, was told she was too old to receive treatment for a head injury at Ashford 24 Hour Walk-In Centre. While making her daily trip to the shops on Beechwood Avenue she tripped and fell on the pavement. Bleeding from the head and concerned she may be suffering from concussion, she went to the centre for a check up. But the check up was cut short when another nurse said she was not able to received full treatment because she was over 65 and her complaint was a head injury.

“Woman, 72, ‘too old for treatment’” This is Local London, By Louise Hale (May 30, 2006) http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/n...01.0.woman_72… (http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.774601.0.woman_72…)
David Swain
David Swain, a terminal cancer patient, was refused a drug by the NHS that could extend his life - despite offering to pay part of the cost himself. His offer to meet the monthly £2,000 cost of Erbitux was refused, he said, because the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) ruled it was too expensive.

“Cancer patient denied ‘too costly’ drug” The Yorkshire Post (UK) (4 March 2008) http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/...y39.3839326.jp (http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Cancer-patient-denied-39too-costly39.3839326.jp)
Dawn Ford
Dawn Ford, 67, had to pay out-of-pocket to receive Avastin, an as yet unlicensed, form of Lucentis. The Echo (UK publication) launched its “Save Our Sight” campaign last year in a bid to make Lucentis and Macugen - another vital drug - available on the NHS.

“Calls for guidance on treatment for cause of blindness” Express & Echo (UK) (19 February 2008) http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displa...nodeId=137015… (http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=137015…)
“Dawn Faces Up to Losing Her Sight” Express & Echo (UK) (24 March 2008) http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displa...nodeId=136993… (http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=136993…)
“Health Trust Reviews Eye Treatment Policy” Express & Echo (UK) By Nadia Stone (5 April 2008) http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displa...nodeId=142328… (http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=142328…)
Debbie Hirsts
Debbie Hirsts, 57, was denied access by the NHS to a drug that would have slowed the progression of her breast cancer. With her oncologist’s support, Debbie decided to raise the $120,000 for the medicine herself. The situation changed in December 2007, when Debbie’s doctor told her the NHS would no longer allow her to subsidize the medication. If Debbie decided to pay for the medicine out-of-pocket, she would then need pay for all of her cancer treatments, which she could not afford, and would no longer receive free health benefits from the NHS.

“Paying Patients Test British Health Care System” The New York Times, By Sarah Lyall (February 21, 2008) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/wo...21britain.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/world/europe/21britain.html)
Deborah Sugg Ryan
Deborah Sugg Ryan, a breast cancer patient, was denied a £20 test for HER2, a protein which affects the growth of cancer cells, at Derriford Hospital back in October.

“Penryn cancer patient’s case ‘a scandal’ says MP” The West Briton, By Ginette Harris (28 February 2008) http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/disp...nodeId=144143… (http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=144143…)
Jacky Pickles
Jacky Pickles, 44, said that after 25 years working in the NHS, she will have to give the final years of her life to a Health Service that refuses to save her. Her condition improved when she went on a Velcade drug trial earlier this year, but has now been told that she will not get the drug again when her condition deteriorates. She said: “I am absolutely devastated by NICE’s decision. I believe that Patricia Hewitt has, through the back door of NICE, encouraged a new policy that saves the NHS money by condemning patients to an early death which means they are less of a financial burden both in the short term and the long term.

“Medical apartheid as English cancer patients are denied life-extending drug” The Daily Mail, By Tim Shipman (October 20, 2006) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...cle_id=411521… (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411521…)
Jane Hewitt
Jane Hewitt, 58, who lives in Whitchurch, was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2004. She underwent a lumpectomy on January 6 and then a mastectomy on February 3, 2006. Her surgeon recommended a course of Herceptin but Bristol South and West PCT refused to pay for it. She appealed but was turned down because the PCT said there were no exceptional circumstances in her case. Mrs. Hewitt, took a lump sum from her pension and has so far paid out £9,500 for her three weekly injections.

“Cancer patient won’t have to pay for drugs” The Bristol Evening Post, By Julie Harding (July 3, 2006) (Subscription Required)
Linda Lucas
Linda Lucas, a 51-year-old teacher from Cupar, Fife, was diagnosed with breast cancer and given a surgery wait time of 8-9 weeks. She had medical insurance and chose “to go private,” resulting in a mastectomy three weeks later.

“Scots cancer victims face deadly delays in treatment” The Scotsman, By Eddie Barnes and Richard Gray (June 25, 2006) http://news.scotsman.com/bowelcancer...dly.2786941.jp (http://news.scotsman.com/bowelcancer/Scots-cancer-victims-face-deadly.2786941.jp)
“The Sufferer: ‘No treatment – but cells multiplying’” The Scotsman (November 29, 2006)
Lynda Coghill
Lynda Coghill, was diagnosed with ovarian cancer at 39. At an appointment after surgery and radiation, she told her oncologist she was still bleeding. He did a quick exam, announced she had a new tumor, and said bluntly: “Your chances are slim to none.” He told her to wait a few weeks for the results of a biopsy, then left to treat a patient down the hall. “I looked at the nurse in sheer disbelief,” Ms. Coghill says. “The doctor had proceeded to tell me, in less than 30 seconds, that I was going to die.” She cried for days, unable to eat or sleep. She and her husband planned her funeral. At last, she contacted the sympathetic nurse from the doctor’s office and persuaded her to call for an “unofficial” biopsy report. The tumor was benign. Eight years later, Ms. Coghill remains angry about having been treated “like a numbered object on an assembly line.”


http://www.biggovhealth.org/stories (http://www.biggovhealth.org/stories)
__________________
http://www.biggovhealth.org/ (http://www.biggovhealth.org/)

[Capitalist Patriot]

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Rahm (Obama's chief of staff) is DC insider who specializes in end-of-life issues.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephaniegutmann/100004794/obamacare-the-elderly-might-as-well-have-a-bulls-eye-painted-on-their-backs/ (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephaniegutmann/100004794/obamacare-the-elderly-might-as-well-have-a-bulls-eye-painted-on-their-backs/)


There’s a spectre haunting the edges of President Obama’s health care overhaul and it’s one reason people are recoiling in such large numbers. It’s the vision of European style hospices and of “the duty to die,” as one American congressman put it in a debate about so-called “end of life” issues. Americans sense that we are only steps away from being told the elderly - your parents, your grandparents, you soon enough - “cost us money” by stubbornly hanging on to life when they get ill.

The debate over ObamaCare has been full of talk about people who “cost us money.” Peggy Noonan brilliantly made the point this weekend in the Wall Street Journal when she wrote:

We are living in a time in which educated people who are at the top of American life feel they have the right to make very public criticisms of … let’s call it the private, pleasurable but health-related choices of others. They shame smokers and the overweight. Drinking will be next ..Only a generation ago such criticisms would have been considered rude and unacceptable.

But they are part of the ugly, chafing price of having the government in something: Suddenly it can make big and very personal demands on you. Those who live in a way that isn’t sufficiently healthy “cost us money” and “drive up premiums.”

Mr Obama himself said something like it in his press conference, when he spoke of a person who might not buy health insurance. If he gets hit by a bus, “the rest of us have to pay for it.” …

So this might be an unarticulated public fear: When everyone pays for the same health-care system, the overseers will feel more and more a right to tell you how to live, which simple joys are allowed and which are not.

They’ll also say who is allowed to live, and under the oh-so-pragmatic eyes of ObamaCare beancounters the elderly might as well have a bull’s eye painted on their backs. We see this tendency for targeting the elderly in Obama’s selection of Ezekiel Emanuel, (brother of Rahm), a bio-ethicist specializing in “end of life issues” who recently wrote approvingly that “the progression in end-of-life care mentality from ‘do everything’ to more palliative care shows that change in physician norms and practices is possible.”

And former lieutenant governor of New York state Betsy McCaughey unearthed a real smoking gun when she found the section in one of the house bills that says seniors would have to receive regular “counseling” about their “end of life options” including the “option” of refusing sustenance when faced with serious illness.

Read all about it here. The WSJ article even includes a cite to the page in the bill. Creepy, right? It’s totalitarian, it’s ugly, and it’s not the American way. Congress needs to take a nice, refreshing summer break and start over on health care reform.

[Capitalist Patriot]

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArti...32548165656854 (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854)

It's Not An Option
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, July 15, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Congress: It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IBD Exclusive Series: Government-Run Healthcare: A Prescription For Failure


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:

"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

From the beginning, opponents of the public option plan have warned that if the government gets into the business of offering subsidized health insurance coverage, the private insurance market will wither. Drawn by a public option that will be 30% to 40% cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington's coverage.

The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program. That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers. This could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, "fizzle out altogether."

What wasn't known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law.

The legislation is also likely to finish off health savings accounts, a goal that Democrats have had for years. They want to crush that alternative because nothing gives individuals more control over their medical care, and the government less, than HSAs.

With HSAs out of the way, a key obstacle to the left's expansion of the welfare state will be removed.

The public option won't be an option for many, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny.

Washington does not have the constitutional or moral authority to outlaw private markets in which parties voluntarily participate. It shouldn't be killing business opportunities, or limiting choices, or legislating major changes in Americans' lives.

It took just 16 pages of reading to find this naked attempt by the political powers to increase their reach. It's scary to think how many more breaches of liberty we'll come across in the final 1,002.
__________________
http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.org (http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.org/)

[JohnCraven]

In other words, he's a terminator - a merchant of death.

What a surprise.

JohnCraven
New Orleans:flag:

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Rahm (Obama's chief of staff) is DC insider who specializes in end-of-life issues.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephaniegutmann/100004794/obamacare-the-elderly-might-as-well-have-a-bulls-eye-painted-on-their-backs/ (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephaniegutmann/100004794/obamacare-the-elderly-might-as-well-have-a-bulls-eye-painted-on-their-backs/)


There’s a spectre haunting the edges of President Obama’s health care overhaul and it’s one reason people are recoiling in such large numbers. It’s the vision of European style hospices and of “the duty to die,” as one American congressman put it in a debate about so-called “end of life” issues. Americans sense that we are only steps away from being told the elderly - your parents, your grandparents, you soon enough - “cost us money” by stubbornly hanging on to life when they get ill.

The debate over ObamaCare has been full of talk about people who “cost us money.” Peggy Noonan brilliantly made the point this weekend in the Wall Street Journal when she wrote:

We are living in a time in which educated people who are at the top of American life feel they have the right to make very public criticisms of … let’s call it the private, pleasurable but health-related choices of others. They shame smokers and the overweight. Drinking will be next ..Only a generation ago such criticisms would have been considered rude and unacceptable.

But they are part of the ugly, chafing price of having the government in something: Suddenly it can make big and very personal demands on you. Those who live in a way that isn’t sufficiently healthy “cost us money” and “drive up premiums.”

Mr Obama himself said something like it in his press conference, when he spoke of a person who might not buy health insurance. If he gets hit by a bus, “the rest of us have to pay for it.” …

So this might be an unarticulated public fear: When everyone pays for the same health-care system, the overseers will feel more and more a right to tell you how to live, which simple joys are allowed and which are not.

They’ll also say who is allowed to live, and under the oh-so-pragmatic eyes of ObamaCare beancounters the elderly might as well have a bull’s eye painted on their backs. We see this tendency for targeting the elderly in Obama’s selection of Ezekiel Emanuel, (brother of Rahm), a bio-ethicist specializing in “end of life issues” who recently wrote approvingly that “the progression in end-of-life care mentality from ‘do everything’ to more palliative care shows that change in physician norms and practices is possible.”

And former lieutenant governor of New York state Betsy McCaughey unearthed a real smoking gun when she found the section in one of the house bills that says seniors would have to receive regular “counseling” about their “end of life options” including the “option” of refusing sustenance when faced with serious illness.

Read all about it here. The WSJ article even includes a cite to the page in the bill. Creepy, right? It’s totalitarian, it’s ugly, and it’s not the American way. Congress needs to take a nice, refreshing summer break and start over on health care reform.

[Capitalist Patriot]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs

[sisyphus]

<snip>
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Administration (GOVT) will have total and complete access to ALL your personal financial, bank and investment information.
<snip>

This is in direct violation of the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

It shows the treasonous acts that are occurring in Washington.

__________________________________________________ _______________
I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves
Thomas Jefferson

[gdoane]

It's pretty stupid to have the government concerned about the costs of health care when the government is the biggest expense in this nation.