Posted by citizens4palin on August 15, 2009 on the Sarah Palin Information Blog
(http://sarahpalininformation.wordpress.com/2009/08/15/page-by-page-of-bill-gov-palin-is-correct-obamacare-is-evil/)
I was able to get through 500 pages of the Health Care Bill and took many examples of the disaster Obama is attempting to force down our throats. Please print the list and bring it with you to any Town Hall meetings or similar gatherings. After reading this bill, I am sure of one thing Øbama is EVIL. Please realize no matter Health Care Bill is passed Obama tried to force this socialist garbage down our throats and as fast as possible.
Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed
Page 30: A Government committee will decide what treatments & benefits you get. This would be the “Death Panel” and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process.
Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services.
Page 59: The Federal Government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electric funds transfer.
Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans such as SEIU, UAW and ACORN.
Page 84: All Private health care plans must participate in the Health care Exchange giving total government control of private plans.
Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care Plan
Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled, you have no choice in the matter.
Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No “judicial review” is permitted against the government monopoly. Simply put, private insurers will be crushed.
Page 127: The government will set doctors wages. The AMA sold doctors out!
Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
Page 126: Employees MUST pay health care bills for part-time employees AND their families.
Page 149: Any Employer with a payroll of $400k or more, who does not offer a public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
Page 150: Any Employer with a payroll of $250k – 400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll.
Page 167: Any individual who does not have acceptable health care (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
Page 195: Offices and employees of the Government Health care Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
Page 203: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” This is directly from the bill!
Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid, Seniors and the poor affected”
Page 241: Doctors: no matter what medical specialty, will all receive the same compensation!!!! You can thank the AMA.
Page 253: Government sets value of the doctor’s time, their professional judgement etc.
Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare companies and industries.
Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
Page 272: Cancer patient treatment will be on a case by case depending on cost of treatment. As Governor Palin described: Death Panels.
Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the Government prevent
able re-admissions.
Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a re-admission, you will be penalized by the Government.
Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited from owning and investing in Health care companies!!!!
Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without Government approval!!!
Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on “community” input: in other words, organizations like ACORN will have authority.
Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures. More Death Panels and rationing.
Page 341: Government has the authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs etc.
Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals. Trig and other children with Down Syndrome will be excluded or accepted according to Øbama’s Death Panel.
Page 379: The Tele-Health Advisory Committee will be established. Health Care by phone.
Page 425: Advance Care Planning: Counseling for Senior Citizens, assisted suicide and euthanasia. Scary and evil!
Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans from the Government.
Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatment you may have at end-of-life.
Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services will be made available: organizations such as ACORN.
Page 472: Payments will be provided to Community-based organizations (ACORN).
Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing services.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Barack Obama: The Ultimate "Shovel-Ready" Project
By John Fielding
Obama, in his public appearances, has taken to contradicting himself. In several town halls, he has pointed out Medicare as a bright and shining star of government achievement. And it is true that the seniors have come to depend on the government dole in the form of senior health care. And Obama has pointed out that the very seniors that are clutching Medicare to their bosoms with the grip of death are the very ones so concerned about a government health care takeover.
However, then Obama, sometimes in the same speech, will point out how Medicare is running out of money, thus implying that the program is unsustainable in its present form. Well, if this program is unsustainable, how will the new public option be sustained? And what happens to those whose major health care issues pop up in the last years of their lives in a system of limited resources that is dedicated to allocation of scarce health care resources?
Further, government does not encourage innovation and does not reward achievement. From where are the new health care initiatives and inventions to come? And why would new medical students want to become government slugs, only able to earn up to some government cap ("from each according to his ability; to each according to his needs"). The entire mess sounds like a prescription for a latter day incarnation of the Twentieth Century Motor Company from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.
Obama need look no further than his own speeches for a "shovel-ready" project.
Obama, in his public appearances, has taken to contradicting himself. In several town halls, he has pointed out Medicare as a bright and shining star of government achievement. And it is true that the seniors have come to depend on the government dole in the form of senior health care. And Obama has pointed out that the very seniors that are clutching Medicare to their bosoms with the grip of death are the very ones so concerned about a government health care takeover.
However, then Obama, sometimes in the same speech, will point out how Medicare is running out of money, thus implying that the program is unsustainable in its present form. Well, if this program is unsustainable, how will the new public option be sustained? And what happens to those whose major health care issues pop up in the last years of their lives in a system of limited resources that is dedicated to allocation of scarce health care resources?
Further, government does not encourage innovation and does not reward achievement. From where are the new health care initiatives and inventions to come? And why would new medical students want to become government slugs, only able to earn up to some government cap ("from each according to his ability; to each according to his needs"). The entire mess sounds like a prescription for a latter day incarnation of the Twentieth Century Motor Company from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.
Obama need look no further than his own speeches for a "shovel-ready" project.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
A "Practical" Solution to the Health Care "Crisis"
By John Fielding
My new friend, "Practical Conservative," "prefers" a free market solution to the health care situation, but, failing that, opts for socialized medicine. How is socialized medicine a practical solution. Waiting lines, diagnoses postponed far beyond the point of cure, rationing of health care. My new friend evidently proposes this as "practical." Well, then, as Lincoln would say, as his faith is let it be to him. The solution to the "practicality" of the Canadian and English system is Detroit and New York, respectively. Where are we to go when this "practical" solution is adopted here?
Even though my belief is that the free market should take care of this area, including the licensing of physicians and the like, I realize years of dependency on government has turned the American people into pigs that must return to the mud of a government solution.
Therefore, I offer the following modest proposal, gleaned from the John Mackey opinion piece, "The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare," found in the August 11, 2009 on-line edition of the Wall Street Journal.
First, "remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs). The combination of high-deductible health insurance and HSAs is one solution that could solve many of our health-care problems."
Second, "equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair."
Third, "repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable."
Fourth, "repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying."
Fifth, "make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?"
Sixth, "enact Medicare (and social security reform). We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare and Social Security are heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility."
Seventh, "revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program."
"Health care is a service that we all need, but just like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges. A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. That's because there isn't any."
"This "right" has never existed in America."
"Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care. Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them. All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments."
"Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor's Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million."
According to Nat Hentoff, in an on-line article ("I Am Finally Scared of a White House Administration") at the RealClearPolitics web site, ObamaCare wishes a federal board to discover whether you merit federal funds in order to continue your less-than-optimum life. The board is slready in the stimulus package and, even though taken out of the Senate Finance Committee version of the bill, but can, of course, be added back in during later negotiations.
And why shouldn't we expect this? Obama himself told us to evaluate him by those surrounding him. Very well. The brother of Rahm Emmanuel, bioethicist Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel supports the rationing of health care for those who have lived longer. As Hentoff states "he calls this form of rationing - which is fundamental to Obamacare goals - 'the complete lives system.' You see, at 65 or older, you've had more life years than a 25-year-old. As such, the latter can be more deserving of cost-efficient health care than older folks."
Those of us involved in the pro-life movement for a few years can recognize the "interest-balancing" test found in Roe v. Wade. As an unborn baby grows in gestational life, it gains more of an interest in its continued existence as over against the mother, whose interest in an abortion decreases. In this case, as a person gets older, he or she moves more in the direction of a "completed life" in Dr. Emmanuel's metric and thus his or her ability to advocate for continued existence decreases vis a vis the argument that may be advanced by younger people.
After all, Hentoff reports that Obama himself, in an interview in the New York Times of April 28 (quoted in an editorial in a Washington times July 9 editorial) stated that "'the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care' costs."
Well, if the chronically ill and the at the end of life account for that much of the expenditures, where does one cut? Well, one "encourages" these folks to leave us. As Richard Lamm famously stated, "the elderly have the duty to die and get out of the way."
People like making sport of Sarah Palin for using the rather purple phrase "death panel" to describe this federal board, but what else shall we call it?
Hentoff reports "A specific end-of-life proposal is in draft Section 1233 of H.R. 3200, a House Democratic health care bill that is echoed in two others that also call for versions of 'advance care planning consultation' every five years - or sooner if the patient is diagnosed with a progressive or terminal illness.
My new friend, "Practical Conservative," "prefers" a free market solution to the health care situation, but, failing that, opts for socialized medicine. How is socialized medicine a practical solution. Waiting lines, diagnoses postponed far beyond the point of cure, rationing of health care. My new friend evidently proposes this as "practical." Well, then, as Lincoln would say, as his faith is let it be to him. The solution to the "practicality" of the Canadian and English system is Detroit and New York, respectively. Where are we to go when this "practical" solution is adopted here?
Even though my belief is that the free market should take care of this area, including the licensing of physicians and the like, I realize years of dependency on government has turned the American people into pigs that must return to the mud of a government solution.
Therefore, I offer the following modest proposal, gleaned from the John Mackey opinion piece, "The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare," found in the August 11, 2009 on-line edition of the Wall Street Journal.
First, "remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs). The combination of high-deductible health insurance and HSAs is one solution that could solve many of our health-care problems."
Second, "equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair."
Third, "repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable."
Fourth, "repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying."
Fifth, "make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?"
Sixth, "enact Medicare (and social security reform). We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare and Social Security are heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility."
Seventh, "revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program."
"Health care is a service that we all need, but just like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges. A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. That's because there isn't any."
"This "right" has never existed in America."
"Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care. Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them. All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments."
"Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor's Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million."
According to Nat Hentoff, in an on-line article ("I Am Finally Scared of a White House Administration") at the RealClearPolitics web site, ObamaCare wishes a federal board to discover whether you merit federal funds in order to continue your less-than-optimum life. The board is slready in the stimulus package and, even though taken out of the Senate Finance Committee version of the bill, but can, of course, be added back in during later negotiations.
And why shouldn't we expect this? Obama himself told us to evaluate him by those surrounding him. Very well. The brother of Rahm Emmanuel, bioethicist Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel supports the rationing of health care for those who have lived longer. As Hentoff states "he calls this form of rationing - which is fundamental to Obamacare goals - 'the complete lives system.' You see, at 65 or older, you've had more life years than a 25-year-old. As such, the latter can be more deserving of cost-efficient health care than older folks."
Those of us involved in the pro-life movement for a few years can recognize the "interest-balancing" test found in Roe v. Wade. As an unborn baby grows in gestational life, it gains more of an interest in its continued existence as over against the mother, whose interest in an abortion decreases. In this case, as a person gets older, he or she moves more in the direction of a "completed life" in Dr. Emmanuel's metric and thus his or her ability to advocate for continued existence decreases vis a vis the argument that may be advanced by younger people.
After all, Hentoff reports that Obama himself, in an interview in the New York Times of April 28 (quoted in an editorial in a Washington times July 9 editorial) stated that "'the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care' costs."
Well, if the chronically ill and the at the end of life account for that much of the expenditures, where does one cut? Well, one "encourages" these folks to leave us. As Richard Lamm famously stated, "the elderly have the duty to die and get out of the way."
People like making sport of Sarah Palin for using the rather purple phrase "death panel" to describe this federal board, but what else shall we call it?
Hentoff reports "A specific end-of-life proposal is in draft Section 1233 of H.R. 3200, a House Democratic health care bill that is echoed in two others that also call for versions of 'advance care planning consultation' every five years - or sooner if the patient is diagnosed with a progressive or terminal illness.
As the Washington Post's Charles Lane penetratingly explains ("Undue influence," Aug. 8): 'the government would pay doctors to discuss with Medicare patients explanations of "living wills and durable powers of attorney ... and (provide) a list of national and state-specific resources to assist consumers and their families" on making advance-care planning (read end-of-life) decisions.'
Significantly, Lane adds that, 'The doctor 'shall' (that's an order) explain that Medicare pays for hospice care (hint, hint).'
"But the Obama administration claims these fateful consultations are 'purely voluntary.' In response, Lane - who learned a lot about reading between the lines while the Washington Post's Supreme Court reporter - advises us:
"But the Obama administration claims these fateful consultations are 'purely voluntary.' In response, Lane - who learned a lot about reading between the lines while the Washington Post's Supreme Court reporter - advises us:
'"To me, 'purely voluntary' means 'not unless the patient requests one.'"'
But Obamas' doctors will initiate these chats. 'Patients,' notes Lane, 'may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority.'
And who will these doctors be? What criteria will such Obama advisers as Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel set for conductors of end-of-life services?"
Just so. I guess I am just not "practical" enough to see socialized medicine a la Obama as an acceptable solution.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
