Showing posts with label Citizens Council On Health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Citizens Council On Health. Show all posts

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Obama's AMA Snow Job: More Red Tape, More Denied Coverage

Recently Barack Obama continued his "sell the agenda" snow job tours he has been making throughout the country on behalf of his big business, big union agendas and spoke to the members of the American Medical Association with respect to his plan to nationalize health care costs and coverage in this country.

He has been patting himself on the back in various speaking engagements ever since due to his perceived success in selling this agenda to the medical community and doctors, many of which are already affiliated with big business health care networks and professional associations other than the huge American Medical Association.

Thus, dealing now with Boards of Directors determining care, and also private health care providers due to the negligence of Washington actually performing their jobs in "regulating commerce" and its historic abuses over their practices, which is truly what is needed and would reduce the costs of health care tremendously since maybe some of those huge medical malpractice awards would cease due to their contributory negligence in many of those cases.

Especially since the lid on punitive damages for such awards were removed through the lobbying efforts of the Trial Lawyers Association years ago, which started this mess. Many doctors can't afford to practice, or their rates went off the chart due to the huge amounts they had to pay for malpractice.

And just who are the citizens going to redress a grievance on a governmentally denied claim, or bureautic morass that results in more citizen loss of life or injury? You would think the TLA would be screaming foul at the top of their lungs at this point, since it would appear their livelihoods and gravy train just might be adversely affected, along with their own eventual medical needs and care.

And at least would be happy to rethink their own contributions to this mess of high health care costs in the process, and what the long term effect has been to put this country where it is today.

And work on busting up some of those health care networks which have compromised the quality of care now across the board also after Nixon's bogus HMO concept was signed into law in the 70's, thus the "industry," rather than "profession" changed forever - and not for the better as our infant survival rates now will attest. Lower now than Cuba.

Right now, coverage under Medicare and Medicaid leaves much to be desired for the World War II generation. I can attest to that since after months of high blood pressure registering off the charts, and then even after edema set in, my elderly mother's health care provider never tested her for a blockage and a day after New Year's a little over a year ago, suffered a heart attack which eventually resulted in two different surgeries to correct.

So much for comprehensive coverage. And she even had a "supplemental" plan, no less.

Mr. Obama went on to assure the doctors that this would be another one of his "partnerships," and that it would not in any manner affect private health care coverage, simply expand and provide coverage for those at the present time that cannot afford it.

And I've got a bridge in Alaska to sell you.

Since the primary purchasers of health care are private industries and businesses, what makes Mr. Obama think that these businesses will continue to pick up the costs for private coverage which eats into their profit margins, after all, for those labor costs when they can simply direct their employees to sign up for the governmental "cut rate" plan?

And even with "supplemental" insurance then purchased individually by citizens to afford preventive care (since I'm sure those costs will not be picked up by any public plan), if the government is the primary carrier in such instance (as it was in my mother's case) would it not be the government then still that would determine the level of care and not the secondary provider?

Many private practice doctors have simply now posted signs that indicate that they do not or will not accept new Medicare patients, due to the governmental hoops and red tape involved in getting compensation for their services, and/or dealing with the bureaucracy rather than being able to actually treat patients.

And which government contractor/benefactor will be getting this lucrative new contract?

Mr. Buffett as with his Geico Insurance through another joint venture outside SEC scrutiny? I know Mr. Geithner is overseeing that AIG restructuring outside the scrutiny of the public and Congress at the present time. Not many have the bucks to buy some of that "debt" (if there is any, as a "globally" based corporation, other than that London office mess Americans are now stuck for the tab). I wonder how the Berkshire Hathaway shareholders would fare in such a deal, or whether they would be cut out as the public shareholders were in the GM "joint venture."

Even if that isn't the case and it is funded through taxation and administered by the federal government rather than another "public/private" partnership and governmental contract, exactly how many new employees in Health and Human Services will be needed in order to administer such a hugh undertaking. Does Washington simply plan to enlist all the currently employees of the separate state funded plans simply changing their civil service codes? When those employers and businesses drop those plans, how many new taxpayer paid government workers will be needed.

This sounds like another Chamber of Commerce dream come true, and another unaccountable source of revenue for the Feds bottom line to dip into at will, sort of like Social Security.

And how much time and sessions will it take to work the bugs out and tweak that legislation which most likely has enough holes and cavets in it to fill the Grand Canyon so the lawyers can run with it, and how much it will cost in the added costs for the courts that will be needed when the lawyers then bleed the families and public dry so the government and federal judiciary can then beginning denying claims and coverages in order to set precedents for political purposes?

How many more trillion is this going to cost the taxpayers?

Maybe these Fortune 500 and global businesses, instead of getting capital gains tax breaks, and favored status with legislators at both the state and federal levels, should be paying taxes based upon ther "worth" as property as was the original taxation method used by the founders. Property is taxed. Income is not.

Then maybe some of those buildings on K Street would clear out. And our public servants could get back to "governing," rather than "appeasing" their favored subjects for political (and personal) gain one again.

As with the foreclosure "solution," Middle East whirlwind tour, stimulus sales pitch, illegal joint venture with the Big Three and unions firing and laying off thousands of Americans and raping them of their retirement nest eggs, and now the illegal alien amnesty ploys, Mr. Obama's "Ask Not" speeches are getting harder to swallow, and used car salesman persona and slick salesmen gimmicks less and less credible with each passing month and as this country sinks further and further into a full out recession/depression.

It appears he might want to put away his Blackberry, and start speaking with the people and not the campaign backers, moochers and yes men since it appears this Constitutional lawyer hasn't a clue, other than what the fawning media pundits propagandize, and the U.S. Chamber members and foreign aid lobbyists wheelers and dealers spew - and most of the "news" station ratings are now in the toilet.

That speaks volumes right there on the credibility of the agenda at this point.

Fancy speeches and throwing money at the big business/big union lobbyists and mandating now health care coverage when many are homeless and jobless at this point truly shows that maybe a mental health check is now what is in order for each and every corporate socialist "representative" on the Hill.

No one is listening anymore. Except the news anchors, and that enclave of delusion, Hollywood.




Digg!

Friday, May 1, 2009

Fighting For Your DNA: Citizens' Council On Health

In addition to the many fronts that are now being waged against American citizens' privacy rights against unlawful search and seizure, chalk one more up that is now being fought on the state level with respect to the most private information, in addition to your medical records, that any American citizen has. His very own DNA.

Right now there is a battle going on in the State of Minnesota with respect to ownership rights of American citizens DNA which is being fought by the Citizens' Council on Health Care.

Twila Brase, the spokesperson for this organization, recently was on the Glenn Beck show attempting to enlighten and educate the public on the assaults which are now going on at both the state and federal levels with respect to Americans; medical information such as the provisions contained within the stimulus package on the establishment of a National Health Care Database, and the even more violative one now being waged in Minnesota over ownership rights of private citizens DNA, and that of their children.

This small, privately funded groups is and has been facing a David and Goliath battle against several medical research facilities, and the huge civic organization, the March of Dimes, who would like to be able to harvest DNA samples from patients in hospitals, including infants, for medical research purposes WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT, and accessible through a "state" warehousing facility.

It appears that these groups and research facilities are attempting to form a public/private partnership with the states in order to house this DNA for what is being represented as "for the good of humanity," in fighting birth defects and genetic diseases, but which also potentially could be used in the future for morally repugnant purposes also, such as selective genetic screenings and abortions, or genetic altering or engineering.

The bill also is rather ambiguous and silent on whether or not these DNA samples then could also be used for other reasons, such as evidence then in criminal proceedings without the issuance of warrants or probable cause thus convicting individuals without affording them the Constitutional protections of due process and meeting evidentiary standards in criminal proceedings.

The state would have custody of these records and samples in a DNA "warehouse."

It also appears that the expenses in maintaining such a warehouse have not also been give even cursory consideration.

CCHC has been fighting in order to place simply minimal "informed consent" requirements within the bill.

But I, as a citizen, believe this fight needs to be expanded in order to provide not merely the "safeguard" of implied consent, but should be mandated to require full disclosure, and "express" consent, a higher legal standard.

Simple implied consent would afford hospital administrators and corporate attorneys to hide such provisions within hospital admittance forms in all the legalese that is already included in such forms.

How many Americans, especially women in the midst of labor, have the presence of mind to truly digest the many pages included within hospital admittance forms now as it is. Express consent forms would require a separate and specific signature form and disclosure, and the risks involved to both patient and in the instance of children, their newborn, and require disclosure of the specific purpose for which the DNA will be used.

My basic question also is why is the state getting involved in this at all, at the taxpayer's expense with respect to warehousing these samples?

If the March of Dimes or Mayo Clinic (one of the research facilities involved) would like access to individual citizens DNA, should this not also be between doctor and patient or guardian, with the March of Dimes and these research facilities then also able to request volunteers for specific, legally sanctioned and regulated research purposes, with laws also strictly formulated and enforced on the storage methods and destruction of those samples and records after the specific research has been concluded?

These researchers must know at this point due to the push now for access to Americans DNA what exactly they hope to achieve with such research.

Limiting through legislation the purposes for which these samples can be used to purely "research" and not in any way "engineering," or as "selective abortion" diagnostic instruments appears to be absent in even minimally addressing this potential can of worms in the legislation as it is now written in its current form.

Below is the link to the CCHC's website, and they could use all the support they can get in fighting this open ended legislation at this point, which is now also spreading to other states throughout the nation:

http://www.cchconline.org/




Digg!