With the ongoing challenges which are now being raised in many states throughout the nation regarding the recent passage of the Obama Administration's Health Care Reform Act, this boomer has watched the progression in health care delivery from the 1960's to today, and can truthfully say that while costs have exploded in those four decades, the degree of care for the American public overall has seen better days.
In order to reduce costs for many of the public and private health care clinics and hospitals, more and more Americans are not receiving the care they deserve, but what will reduce the bottom lines for the nationalized corporatized health care system that is predominant across the nation after Nixon's HMO legislation passed in the 60's. Many even public clinics and hospitals are now "owned" through various contracts by "private" corporate entities as they have become privatized, even after their initial building costs and research grants were funded by the American public.
Upon even emergency room visits, more and more patients are being seen initially by not medical doctors or those with advanced diagnostic degrees, but by physician's assistants or other support staff but at costs that far exceed those fees and charges in the past for trained physicians and without the expertise to accurately diagnose complex medical conditions.
Throughout many states, there are even signs posted at many of these emergency clinics and hospitals advising that they are not accepting new Medicare patients. Thus, the future for the boomers and their offspring at this point in America's history has not even begun to be addressed by those in Washington or at the state levels in just why health care costs have risen so out of proportion to the cost of living even though the entire HMO concept and "free market" privatized clinics were sold to the public in order to reduce costs and provide better care when that legislation was proposed back in the 60's.
Instead, it has resulted in numerous trips to several different doctors or providers in order to get accurate diagnosis, or physicians more geared toward treating the symptoms rather than the disease and using medications which many times create even more problems or different health issues in concert due to drug interactions and complications.
Changes are needed, but not the changes that Washington appears to be focused on in merely consulting the "stakeholders" in corporatized medicine. But the American public that is paying a larger share than ever before for their health care costs, both nonemergency and emergency.
How much of the health care dollars now provided by the taxpayers and insurers are now being earmarked for all those ads on television mostly directed toward choosing a hospital for maternity and childbirth needs? Or elective procedures?
Or advertising their facilities and services for non-English speaking patients for all those federal and state grant monies in providing care for non-citizens at the general public's ultimate expense? Or the increased costs in those ten to twenty page bills passed on to the public for those highly paid lobbyists at the state capitols and Washington?
It appears to this boomer in the end, the Health Care Reform Act is more similar to the mandatory auto insurance laws throughout the nation, with the same mindset and ultimate costs in increased taxation for all in passing on governmental functions, such as the settlement of property claims, or life and death issues to the financial sector, banks and insurers who will be more concerned with THEIR bottom lines and business needs, rather than quality of care.
I mean, unlike mandatory auto insurance, an unpaid or disallowed claim has a greater likelihood and much higher percentage of eventually ending in death or bankruptcy rather than a fender bender so the analogy used in order to include that "mandatory" provision left much out in regulating both those costs, and the provision and most likely will also then, as with the insurance laws, end up again costing the taxpaying public more in providing all the courts that will be needed in order to address those "breach of contract" or "wrongful death" actions.
Progress in this area, as with it appears so many others in the new millineum to many Americans, just may come at a much greater cost than even in those Nixon years.
And it appears to this boomer that the great Health Care Reform Act just may become the precursor to the Great Health Care AND Bank bailout of 2025 or sooner, when this patient dies.
Showing posts with label medicine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label medicine. Show all posts
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Zero Population Growth Activists Behind Obamacare?
In all the debates and townhall meetings, public forums and the like it has amazed me that what is occuring is simply discussions of what the eventual health care reform legislation should look like and encompass, and not at all the fundamental violations of American's "right to choose or not choose" whether to be insured, or at what level of care.
There are many religions that prohibit invasive medical treatments in their practices. We do have freedom of religion in this country, and would appear any such legislation mandating that Americans must have health care coverage is an abridgement of quite a few of the Bill of Rights freedoms that our founding fathers fought and died in order to secure.
This legislation is being promoted by the left wing for feel good reasons most of all at least at the citizen level. What is being also missed is the parties and industries involved and who is being consulted, and also the inherent benefits to them in any such legislation. Politically and otherwise.
Although the Democratic Party has always held itself out to be the party of the people, rather than industry - Mr. Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi clearly demonstrated that they are just as much big business political lackeys as those in the Republican Party have historically been.
In fact, two of Mr. Obama's most ardent supporters and campaign contributors are Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. This legislation stands to profit both enornously, since one is a Wall Street guru heavily invested in the health care industry through his Geico Insurance (which provides and gives discounts to government employees), and the other the founder of Microsoft, who stands to also profit handsomely with the National Health Care Database which was included with the stimulus bills (and hidden for the most part from the public) sums for the software to begin this massive unconstitutional undertaking.
Placing the most personal and private information any American has on a federally accessible database would have the founding fathers storming the White House and shouting for the call to arms.
Both are also believers and support foundations that are dedicated to zero population growth, as are many members of the Democratic Party from the 1960's era that were involved in that movement. And the U.N. and WHO are also believers in population control and promote seminars and initiatives dedicated to it.
And interestingly enough, both Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates have three children (not two, replacement) of their own.
So the hypocrites abound in this legislation, which for all intents in purposes, Hippocrates had nothing to do with. And would end up compromising many ethical doctors Hippocratic oaths also in the process in governmentally determined treatment plans, rathr than physician determined. And it appears neither does the AMA anymore, another announceed supporter for the provisions contained in Mr. Obama's proposed "solution." Using the "corporate" medical community when many within it are vigorously also opposed to any such legislation.
Which is sounding more and more like the "solution" Hitler used in order to determine who was and was not ultimately worth of life, or whose life was worthy for the "greater good" of the Fatherland.
China instituted the "one birth" rule for their population under Communist control long ago. And in the process, infancide rates due to sexual preferences became commonplace.
Lady Liberty had different plans for this nation, and more heart and soul.
It is difficult watching loved ones age and the physical deterioration that goes along with it. It also forces us many times to address our own mortality and untimely end.
In our fast food world now of Twitter and turnaround mastectomies, is life and death now to be determined according to what is more expedient and cost effective for the state (i.e., politicians and their stock portfolios, since all future legislation will be directed toward reducing more and more the "insurers" or health care industries risk and losses if history now serves correctly).
How many elderly people have they spoken to that value each and every day they have left, so long as they are still able to breathe? And while they may be in pain, isn't pain a part of all facets of life be it emotional or physical and simply just makes those painfree moments all the more cherished?
There are many religions that prohibit invasive medical treatments in their practices. We do have freedom of religion in this country, and would appear any such legislation mandating that Americans must have health care coverage is an abridgement of quite a few of the Bill of Rights freedoms that our founding fathers fought and died in order to secure.
This legislation is being promoted by the left wing for feel good reasons most of all at least at the citizen level. What is being also missed is the parties and industries involved and who is being consulted, and also the inherent benefits to them in any such legislation. Politically and otherwise.
Although the Democratic Party has always held itself out to be the party of the people, rather than industry - Mr. Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi clearly demonstrated that they are just as much big business political lackeys as those in the Republican Party have historically been.
In fact, two of Mr. Obama's most ardent supporters and campaign contributors are Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. This legislation stands to profit both enornously, since one is a Wall Street guru heavily invested in the health care industry through his Geico Insurance (which provides and gives discounts to government employees), and the other the founder of Microsoft, who stands to also profit handsomely with the National Health Care Database which was included with the stimulus bills (and hidden for the most part from the public) sums for the software to begin this massive unconstitutional undertaking.
Placing the most personal and private information any American has on a federally accessible database would have the founding fathers storming the White House and shouting for the call to arms.
Both are also believers and support foundations that are dedicated to zero population growth, as are many members of the Democratic Party from the 1960's era that were involved in that movement. And the U.N. and WHO are also believers in population control and promote seminars and initiatives dedicated to it.
And interestingly enough, both Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates have three children (not two, replacement) of their own.
So the hypocrites abound in this legislation, which for all intents in purposes, Hippocrates had nothing to do with. And would end up compromising many ethical doctors Hippocratic oaths also in the process in governmentally determined treatment plans, rathr than physician determined. And it appears neither does the AMA anymore, another announceed supporter for the provisions contained in Mr. Obama's proposed "solution." Using the "corporate" medical community when many within it are vigorously also opposed to any such legislation.
Which is sounding more and more like the "solution" Hitler used in order to determine who was and was not ultimately worth of life, or whose life was worthy for the "greater good" of the Fatherland.
China instituted the "one birth" rule for their population under Communist control long ago. And in the process, infancide rates due to sexual preferences became commonplace.
Lady Liberty had different plans for this nation, and more heart and soul.
It is difficult watching loved ones age and the physical deterioration that goes along with it. It also forces us many times to address our own mortality and untimely end.
In our fast food world now of Twitter and turnaround mastectomies, is life and death now to be determined according to what is more expedient and cost effective for the state (i.e., politicians and their stock portfolios, since all future legislation will be directed toward reducing more and more the "insurers" or health care industries risk and losses if history now serves correctly).
How many elderly people have they spoken to that value each and every day they have left, so long as they are still able to breathe? And while they may be in pain, isn't pain a part of all facets of life be it emotional or physical and simply just makes those painfree moments all the more cherished?
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Obama and Congress's Non-Universale Health Care Plan: Are States Ceding Powers?
What is now being presented in "politically correct" terms as is being reported on the universal health care plans now being "hatched" in Washington is nothing more than using "politically correct" corporate logic and analogy to justify a plan under which the Nazi's operated.
Evaluate life on a cost/benefit ratio, and genetic superiority by subjective criteria. And that criteria will be some lackey in Washington trained as an actuary according to the health care provider (since this will be a huge government contract, I would imagine that it will be Warren Buffett and AIG, the global insurer "bailed out" on the backs of the American people that get the contract, in another public/private partnership to "stimulate" the global economy and as payback for Mr. Buffett's campaign support of a great many of those on the Hill over the years no matter which party "officially" was in office, since he has expressed interest in expanding his empire to global investment as recently as two to three years ago).
And Buffett is a zero population growth guy (although has three children of his own, so zero growth must not apply to those who consider themselves as genetically superior and apparently own businesses that provide fundamental "life" costs and owe their very livelihoods to the public as now more a financial services company than a solely publicly funded "product" which it is).
What is needed is regulation over the health care industry, which was actually circumvented under Nixon who allowed medicine to be corporatized with that HMO concept. Which has resulted in Boards of Directors, rather than doctors, now determining levels of treatment. And the "caps" placed back on punitive damages for medical malpractice awards that stood at the treble levels under the common law throughout our nations history until the TLA went across the country getting those lids removed for their own "welfare."
Not getting into bed with the unions and insurers, or taking over health care which is determined then by the "distant ruler." And also evaluating just why it is that the costs to train new doctors has far exceeded the cost of living and bears no relevance at all to the actual costs.....since the taxpayers themselves fund those universities in which they are trained.
This is a nightmare, and all those that think this is a solution, you are talking Orwell here now.
Not to mention that even at its most basic level, the entire socializing of our health care is actually not at all a governmental function under our existing law, the U.S. Constitution.
What is needed is what the founders provided. Strict regulation of those national and global insurers, and also better oversight of doctors independent of the AMA, and also breaking up those "monopolies" and health care networks that are using business models now in order to evaluate health care provision, and incompetent and morally challenged doctors who are supplementing their practices and services for governmental cut rate costs by upping their charges on the insureds and those who they profile CAN afford the higher costs.
Some of their support staff know how to work those health insurance forms to the max, and are actually given bonuses if they reach certain quotas set by these health care networks and mega doctor's practices.
Neither business models, nor governmental actuaries have any moral fibre or background. And if anything this is not an "industry" at all, it is a basic service that is a need at one time or another for all Americans.
So the lax oversight of this industry and favoritism for the health care leeches such as the unions and providers is what has lead to this. And Nixon's crap with the HMO concept, and over-inflated costs to train new doctors for the banker's profit margins which makes most of them bankrupt before they even begin their practices.
But I think what is being missed by most Americans is that whether or not to provide or "socialize" health care really is a state issue, not a federal one at all. That is why the local governments were to be the most powerful, not the federal government for such matters as public education, and health costs.
And that the states are voluntarily ceding their power to the federal government, all representations in the 10th Amendment movement to the contrary. Because then the states don't have to come up with those "matching sums" and then have more of the public purse to spend on unaccountable and pork projects for their campaign backers.
So I think the true picture here is being obscured by both Congress and the media reports. Because right now the feds are already providing health care for the underinsured and less fortunate, and also now even "illegal" and non-Americans. This "universal" health care that Obama is proposing is nothing more than putting another party, the federal government, now DIRECTLY involved in determining care, rather than the state.
And Americans will have no recourse then other than suing the federal government if denied coverage, and there is a federal statute that provides only for the reimbursement for the actual demonstrated losses, not punitive damages or even the costs or bringing the suit itself. This entire plan will remove actually any and all accountability for health care provision from insurers and also the medical community. Which is why, also all "public faces" to the contrary, the medical community and insurers are also behind it.
That way the insurers can also sell those "supplemental plans" at ridiculous rates, but then fail to pay on them and blame the federal government (the primary insurer) for the denial of also their provision if the federal government denies the coverage.
The truth is actually much more Machiavellian than what is being portrayed. And the headlines so far really tell it all. It is "cut rate" and loss/benefit care, and it appears the boomer generation is one which the federal government would like to get rid of at the earliest opportunity. And also those that are not productive, and each successive generation thereafter.
Until pretty soon, the life expectancy in this country will eventually equal the birth rate survival and be less than third world countries.
I just love that NO ONE ever thinks to examine just why in most of these areas we now are where we are with respect to health care, and our economy. No one examines our history to see how veering from the Constitution and Constitutional intent, has brought us to where we are.
And I disagree on the economy. The reason things haven't "picked up" is because the market is speaking, and by that I mean the American people. Who would buy a home today with the way those loans are written, since the terms of the loans which also created this disaster have not been addressed or changed in some of their usurous terms and rates?
Nothing has changed, Obama is simply attempting to entice the new home buyers and refinancing in order to trap another generation in the boom and bust cycle -which is the fault of the unregulated and uncontrolled Federal Reserve and its policies.
No one is buying into the stock market, because Obama and Congress proved that when push comes to shove, it is the unions and foreign investors that are protected, not the individual American investor.
Do you really think these lessons have not been lost on most educated or aware Americans? And how many that have lost their homes now can qualify for new ones, what with the lack of regulation also over the credit reporting services?
These guys are in their own bubble. The market is speaking, and so are the Americans. We aren't buying your products because you are all a bunch of scam artists.
The people have spoken.
Evaluate life on a cost/benefit ratio, and genetic superiority by subjective criteria. And that criteria will be some lackey in Washington trained as an actuary according to the health care provider (since this will be a huge government contract, I would imagine that it will be Warren Buffett and AIG, the global insurer "bailed out" on the backs of the American people that get the contract, in another public/private partnership to "stimulate" the global economy and as payback for Mr. Buffett's campaign support of a great many of those on the Hill over the years no matter which party "officially" was in office, since he has expressed interest in expanding his empire to global investment as recently as two to three years ago).
And Buffett is a zero population growth guy (although has three children of his own, so zero growth must not apply to those who consider themselves as genetically superior and apparently own businesses that provide fundamental "life" costs and owe their very livelihoods to the public as now more a financial services company than a solely publicly funded "product" which it is).
What is needed is regulation over the health care industry, which was actually circumvented under Nixon who allowed medicine to be corporatized with that HMO concept. Which has resulted in Boards of Directors, rather than doctors, now determining levels of treatment. And the "caps" placed back on punitive damages for medical malpractice awards that stood at the treble levels under the common law throughout our nations history until the TLA went across the country getting those lids removed for their own "welfare."
Not getting into bed with the unions and insurers, or taking over health care which is determined then by the "distant ruler." And also evaluating just why it is that the costs to train new doctors has far exceeded the cost of living and bears no relevance at all to the actual costs.....since the taxpayers themselves fund those universities in which they are trained.
This is a nightmare, and all those that think this is a solution, you are talking Orwell here now.
Not to mention that even at its most basic level, the entire socializing of our health care is actually not at all a governmental function under our existing law, the U.S. Constitution.
What is needed is what the founders provided. Strict regulation of those national and global insurers, and also better oversight of doctors independent of the AMA, and also breaking up those "monopolies" and health care networks that are using business models now in order to evaluate health care provision, and incompetent and morally challenged doctors who are supplementing their practices and services for governmental cut rate costs by upping their charges on the insureds and those who they profile CAN afford the higher costs.
Some of their support staff know how to work those health insurance forms to the max, and are actually given bonuses if they reach certain quotas set by these health care networks and mega doctor's practices.
Neither business models, nor governmental actuaries have any moral fibre or background. And if anything this is not an "industry" at all, it is a basic service that is a need at one time or another for all Americans.
So the lax oversight of this industry and favoritism for the health care leeches such as the unions and providers is what has lead to this. And Nixon's crap with the HMO concept, and over-inflated costs to train new doctors for the banker's profit margins which makes most of them bankrupt before they even begin their practices.
But I think what is being missed by most Americans is that whether or not to provide or "socialize" health care really is a state issue, not a federal one at all. That is why the local governments were to be the most powerful, not the federal government for such matters as public education, and health costs.
And that the states are voluntarily ceding their power to the federal government, all representations in the 10th Amendment movement to the contrary. Because then the states don't have to come up with those "matching sums" and then have more of the public purse to spend on unaccountable and pork projects for their campaign backers.
So I think the true picture here is being obscured by both Congress and the media reports. Because right now the feds are already providing health care for the underinsured and less fortunate, and also now even "illegal" and non-Americans. This "universal" health care that Obama is proposing is nothing more than putting another party, the federal government, now DIRECTLY involved in determining care, rather than the state.
And Americans will have no recourse then other than suing the federal government if denied coverage, and there is a federal statute that provides only for the reimbursement for the actual demonstrated losses, not punitive damages or even the costs or bringing the suit itself. This entire plan will remove actually any and all accountability for health care provision from insurers and also the medical community. Which is why, also all "public faces" to the contrary, the medical community and insurers are also behind it.
That way the insurers can also sell those "supplemental plans" at ridiculous rates, but then fail to pay on them and blame the federal government (the primary insurer) for the denial of also their provision if the federal government denies the coverage.
The truth is actually much more Machiavellian than what is being portrayed. And the headlines so far really tell it all. It is "cut rate" and loss/benefit care, and it appears the boomer generation is one which the federal government would like to get rid of at the earliest opportunity. And also those that are not productive, and each successive generation thereafter.
Until pretty soon, the life expectancy in this country will eventually equal the birth rate survival and be less than third world countries.
I just love that NO ONE ever thinks to examine just why in most of these areas we now are where we are with respect to health care, and our economy. No one examines our history to see how veering from the Constitution and Constitutional intent, has brought us to where we are.
And I disagree on the economy. The reason things haven't "picked up" is because the market is speaking, and by that I mean the American people. Who would buy a home today with the way those loans are written, since the terms of the loans which also created this disaster have not been addressed or changed in some of their usurous terms and rates?
Nothing has changed, Obama is simply attempting to entice the new home buyers and refinancing in order to trap another generation in the boom and bust cycle -which is the fault of the unregulated and uncontrolled Federal Reserve and its policies.
No one is buying into the stock market, because Obama and Congress proved that when push comes to shove, it is the unions and foreign investors that are protected, not the individual American investor.
Do you really think these lessons have not been lost on most educated or aware Americans? And how many that have lost their homes now can qualify for new ones, what with the lack of regulation also over the credit reporting services?
These guys are in their own bubble. The market is speaking, and so are the Americans. We aren't buying your products because you are all a bunch of scam artists.
The people have spoken.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Al Sharpton: Get Educated On Border Issues And Off The Soapbox
The "Don King" of race relations strikes again.
Recently there appeared an article indicating that Al Sharpton has now visited Phoenix to take on the "baddest Sheriff in the West" in my former home state of Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Interesting that two press hounds such as Al Sharpton and Sheriff Joe are now being engaged in an "Al and Joe" show for the locals in Arizona, and also now moving it to the federal stage.
Sheriff Joe, of course, is now under investigation by the Senate Judiciary for his alleged "profiling" done in some of his barricades conducted throughout the City of Phoenix, in which I lived for over 45 years on his "immigration sweeps."
The charges, of course, were politically brought by Phil Gordon, Mayor of Phoenix and assisted, of course, by Ms. Napolitano, my former governor who is behind the "right wing extremist" memorandums and Fusion Centers training local law enforcement in jack boot citizen surveillance tactics, and strip searches at the domestic airports. After, of course, making Arizona a "sanctuary state," while attempting to appear to be addressing the situation by calling out the National Guard, and then disempowering them in the process.
Which now, of course, two years later has resulted in the deaths of many Arizonans due to the spillover of the drug cartel wars going on in the border towns, and increases in gang related drug and property thefts in metropolitan Tucson and Phoenix, and is a contributory factor for many now in Arizona which are losing their homes and jobs right and left, of course left out of the media spins on the foreclosure mess. Arizona is second or third, depending on the month, in the amount of home foreclosures.
Property and auto insurance rates, especially in Phoenix and Tucson, are becoming off the charts due to this federal negligence, and affecting the general population living in the border states in increasing numbers by the year in their inability to afford comprehensive coverage anymore. Of course, the Mexican drivers along with the tourists are responsible for a good number of the auto and truly drunk driving deaths also in the metro area, while the police focus on the sports bar crowds primariy for those federal grant monies for their patrols, and the lease payments for jails they sold several years back to private industries without the public's general knowledge.
The hypocricy is actually quite incredible.
Statistically, the majority of the crimes committed against the lawful citizens actually are committed by the border hoppers, who are Mexican nationals and not U.S. citizens. The ACLU, of course, through the courts for their profit also have gained "more than equal" or "privileges and immunity" now for illegal foreigners committing criminal acts above those that were actually intended to protect the citizens from foreign "attacks" and criminal activity under our Constitution, even though it clearly states: "We the People of the United States...for US and our posterity."
Mexico has a policy of shooting on sight many South Americans intent on criminal activity who are within their borders, and deports or incarcerates immediately any that cannot produce adequate identification or documentation at the local level under their Constitution. In fact, so much as minor traffic violations can be settled with the arresting officers in payment of their "fines," unless it appears more can be gained politically and financially in incarcerating foreigners charged with even misdemeanor violations in that country.
Most of Sheriff Joe's raids actually have been for no more than publicity, sort of like Al Sharpton's agenda. Since the majority of employers which hire those illegals have hardly been Sheriff's Joe's targets - the developers, construction companies, chain car washes, resort and hotel industries and the like. Nor the cartel members or large drug dealers, more the petty criminal "employee" drug users of some of those cartels and the kids who have become addicted due to the target market for their wares. Or trumped up traffic violations and busted tailights for the self-employed gardeners or car wash employees, although they, too, have victimized the community. My identity theft and stolen credit card happened at a locally owned car wash known for hiring them since all of them do.
Instead, he busted a putt putt course using more than nine Sheriff's deputies to arrest five claimed "illegals." For show.
You see, most of those big and small businesses contribute to civic organizations that support the Sheriff's Office and local police departments. A "politically correct" way to insure protection from any and all police action under the employer sanctions laws passed by the lawful citizens in Arizona several years ago. So the major employers are not the targets of Sheriff Joe's possee. Those which have been undertaken have been no more than publicity stunts.
However, both Phil Gordon and Ms. Napolitano actually were just as negligent in their giving protecton to the criminal element through their continued negligence in pressing the state legislature to petition the federal government or file a federal lawsuit on behalf of the citizens of Arizona if necessary under the U.S. Constitution "common defense" provisions in getting the monies in order to fund the needed fencing to stop the flow, and the border hopping drug dealers, car thieves and gang members.
Few Arizonans realize that those HB-1 visas and such are actually requested by the state legislature in Arizona by petition each and every year. And most of those state legislators that paint the anti-illegal or reduced visas for foreigner faces, are the ones who request the most for their Chamber of Commerce friends and backers.
Surely, there is plenty of money to initiated the federal lawsuit needed, and the feds have more than enough to complete that fencing adequately.
They just gave 100 million to the Chamber of Commerce in order to "educate" the public on why their free global markets are much more important than the public's safety and security, and major reason we have a federal government to begin with - to protect this country from foreign attack and invasion.
Not the "jobs and economies" of corporate America.
The federal government truly has lost its way in what its true function actually is, and priorities for expenditure of public sums or incurring public debt.
So, for that matter, has every single level of government apparently.
Cally-for-nia is a prime example, many of whose former residents are now wrecking havoc in Arizona and bringing it to its knees with their political agendas, developers and demands, not realizing that Arizona is not beach front property but a desert, and their expectations and liberal agendas are what screwed up their former home state to the degree it is.
Sharpton getting involved and painting this as a "racial" issue truly does take the cake, although Sheriff Joe under the true law has been out of line in his enforcement tactics by targeting and setting up his barricades and patrols within city limits, rather than county boundaries - which would be his lawful jurisdiction for such actions. Preventing any and all foreigners without visas or green cards from crossing county lines is well within his jurisdiction and authority.
And then, instead of incarcerating them in his "cruel and unusual" punishment tent city jail - in which there have been numerous deaths which have cost the state citizens a bundle and for which the prisoners are now actually charged by Joe for their own incarcerations in that hell hole - turning them over to the U.S. Marshall's office for processing and deportation. As "illegals" there is no inherent right to deportation hearings, and this was the process that was done and was effective and reduced the border problem significantly when I was growing up in Arizona during the 60's and 70's.
The criminal and immigration attorneys, however, wanted their cut of the drug monies seized, and so petitioned for "civil rights" now for foreigners under our Constitution, and which the U.S. Supreme Court again now has inserted another party into it - Non-Americans (foreigners), when those fundamental protections were the "carrot" in order for foreigners who came to this country to forswear their allegiance to their former home countries, and truly become Americans.
Look forward to the Al and Joe roadshow.
Coming to a media outlet near you, while Arizonans and border residents continue to be made the victims of this political and governmental treason.
Recently there appeared an article indicating that Al Sharpton has now visited Phoenix to take on the "baddest Sheriff in the West" in my former home state of Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Interesting that two press hounds such as Al Sharpton and Sheriff Joe are now being engaged in an "Al and Joe" show for the locals in Arizona, and also now moving it to the federal stage.
Sheriff Joe, of course, is now under investigation by the Senate Judiciary for his alleged "profiling" done in some of his barricades conducted throughout the City of Phoenix, in which I lived for over 45 years on his "immigration sweeps."
The charges, of course, were politically brought by Phil Gordon, Mayor of Phoenix and assisted, of course, by Ms. Napolitano, my former governor who is behind the "right wing extremist" memorandums and Fusion Centers training local law enforcement in jack boot citizen surveillance tactics, and strip searches at the domestic airports. After, of course, making Arizona a "sanctuary state," while attempting to appear to be addressing the situation by calling out the National Guard, and then disempowering them in the process.
Which now, of course, two years later has resulted in the deaths of many Arizonans due to the spillover of the drug cartel wars going on in the border towns, and increases in gang related drug and property thefts in metropolitan Tucson and Phoenix, and is a contributory factor for many now in Arizona which are losing their homes and jobs right and left, of course left out of the media spins on the foreclosure mess. Arizona is second or third, depending on the month, in the amount of home foreclosures.
Property and auto insurance rates, especially in Phoenix and Tucson, are becoming off the charts due to this federal negligence, and affecting the general population living in the border states in increasing numbers by the year in their inability to afford comprehensive coverage anymore. Of course, the Mexican drivers along with the tourists are responsible for a good number of the auto and truly drunk driving deaths also in the metro area, while the police focus on the sports bar crowds primariy for those federal grant monies for their patrols, and the lease payments for jails they sold several years back to private industries without the public's general knowledge.
The hypocricy is actually quite incredible.
Statistically, the majority of the crimes committed against the lawful citizens actually are committed by the border hoppers, who are Mexican nationals and not U.S. citizens. The ACLU, of course, through the courts for their profit also have gained "more than equal" or "privileges and immunity" now for illegal foreigners committing criminal acts above those that were actually intended to protect the citizens from foreign "attacks" and criminal activity under our Constitution, even though it clearly states: "We the People of the United States...for US and our posterity."
Mexico has a policy of shooting on sight many South Americans intent on criminal activity who are within their borders, and deports or incarcerates immediately any that cannot produce adequate identification or documentation at the local level under their Constitution. In fact, so much as minor traffic violations can be settled with the arresting officers in payment of their "fines," unless it appears more can be gained politically and financially in incarcerating foreigners charged with even misdemeanor violations in that country.
Most of Sheriff Joe's raids actually have been for no more than publicity, sort of like Al Sharpton's agenda. Since the majority of employers which hire those illegals have hardly been Sheriff's Joe's targets - the developers, construction companies, chain car washes, resort and hotel industries and the like. Nor the cartel members or large drug dealers, more the petty criminal "employee" drug users of some of those cartels and the kids who have become addicted due to the target market for their wares. Or trumped up traffic violations and busted tailights for the self-employed gardeners or car wash employees, although they, too, have victimized the community. My identity theft and stolen credit card happened at a locally owned car wash known for hiring them since all of them do.
Instead, he busted a putt putt course using more than nine Sheriff's deputies to arrest five claimed "illegals." For show.
You see, most of those big and small businesses contribute to civic organizations that support the Sheriff's Office and local police departments. A "politically correct" way to insure protection from any and all police action under the employer sanctions laws passed by the lawful citizens in Arizona several years ago. So the major employers are not the targets of Sheriff Joe's possee. Those which have been undertaken have been no more than publicity stunts.
However, both Phil Gordon and Ms. Napolitano actually were just as negligent in their giving protecton to the criminal element through their continued negligence in pressing the state legislature to petition the federal government or file a federal lawsuit on behalf of the citizens of Arizona if necessary under the U.S. Constitution "common defense" provisions in getting the monies in order to fund the needed fencing to stop the flow, and the border hopping drug dealers, car thieves and gang members.
Few Arizonans realize that those HB-1 visas and such are actually requested by the state legislature in Arizona by petition each and every year. And most of those state legislators that paint the anti-illegal or reduced visas for foreigner faces, are the ones who request the most for their Chamber of Commerce friends and backers.
Surely, there is plenty of money to initiated the federal lawsuit needed, and the feds have more than enough to complete that fencing adequately.
They just gave 100 million to the Chamber of Commerce in order to "educate" the public on why their free global markets are much more important than the public's safety and security, and major reason we have a federal government to begin with - to protect this country from foreign attack and invasion.
Not the "jobs and economies" of corporate America.
The federal government truly has lost its way in what its true function actually is, and priorities for expenditure of public sums or incurring public debt.
So, for that matter, has every single level of government apparently.
Cally-for-nia is a prime example, many of whose former residents are now wrecking havoc in Arizona and bringing it to its knees with their political agendas, developers and demands, not realizing that Arizona is not beach front property but a desert, and their expectations and liberal agendas are what screwed up their former home state to the degree it is.
Sharpton getting involved and painting this as a "racial" issue truly does take the cake, although Sheriff Joe under the true law has been out of line in his enforcement tactics by targeting and setting up his barricades and patrols within city limits, rather than county boundaries - which would be his lawful jurisdiction for such actions. Preventing any and all foreigners without visas or green cards from crossing county lines is well within his jurisdiction and authority.
And then, instead of incarcerating them in his "cruel and unusual" punishment tent city jail - in which there have been numerous deaths which have cost the state citizens a bundle and for which the prisoners are now actually charged by Joe for their own incarcerations in that hell hole - turning them over to the U.S. Marshall's office for processing and deportation. As "illegals" there is no inherent right to deportation hearings, and this was the process that was done and was effective and reduced the border problem significantly when I was growing up in Arizona during the 60's and 70's.
The criminal and immigration attorneys, however, wanted their cut of the drug monies seized, and so petitioned for "civil rights" now for foreigners under our Constitution, and which the U.S. Supreme Court again now has inserted another party into it - Non-Americans (foreigners), when those fundamental protections were the "carrot" in order for foreigners who came to this country to forswear their allegiance to their former home countries, and truly become Americans.
Look forward to the Al and Joe roadshow.
Coming to a media outlet near you, while Arizonans and border residents continue to be made the victims of this political and governmental treason.
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.
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.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
The Downside To Government Provided Health Care: Not Just More Taxes
Last week Barack Obama called leaders of the insurance industry, pharmaceutical companies and labor organizations for a pow-wow regarding one of his fundamental quests as stated during his campaign: health care reform.
Although these three industries are not in any way directly tied to patient care and delivery, it appears Mr. Obama is playing diplomat with this issue and appeaser with these industry leeches in order that they don't lose a piece of their pie under any anticipated governmental program.
Under Obama's plan, it is estimated that approximately 119 million Americans would shift from private insurance to the governmental plan, putting America on the path toward a completely government run socialized health care system. This, of course, would not sit well with the private insurance carriers who would stand to not only lose business, but their very shirts and the jobs of many who are currently hawking those policies to private businesses and individuals.
The pharmaceutical industry, of course, is quite concerned because under any government plan generics and other effective lower cost drugs (think penicillin and cheaper antibiotics) on which there isn't as much profit would most likely be the preferred and "authorized" treatment with Uncle Sam picking up the tab.
Many of those drug company representatives peddling their "new and improved" wares to doctors would also lose their jobs in the process, and a few of those free bonus trips, and the physicans and health care providers a few holiday gifts.
The unions earned their seat at the appeasement table due to the fact that any government plan would impact Big Labor and their own health care plans which have their administrative mark ups also built in which would, most likely, be negotiated away during the next collective bargaining session.
Mr. Obama during his campaigns assured the American people that the governmental plan he was proposing would simply be an "alternate," with Americans then able to make a choice between the government plan or retaining their own private carriers.
What was left unsaid, however, is that most private insurance is not bought by individuals in this country, but by their Big Business employers. Employers who have shareholders to answer to, and are now facing economic woes of their own throughout many major industries due to this Washington precipitated economic meltdown.
Just how long do you think those employers will keep those group plans once the government plan undercuts them?
What also was left unsaid is that the Obama plan also intends to parent America's children and youth, and mandate that parents must insure their children and themselves, and also feed Washington in providing fines and fees for non-compliance.
In other words, another non-consensual tax in the making that, if Medicare and Medicaid are any indication, will be used for other "discretionary" purposes and be an unaccountable bottomless pit of taxation.
I look for this scenario to go one of two ways:
(1) Mr. Obama will continue in his role as appeaser to all with the exception of Joe Citizen, and will attempt to placate the union bosses and fat cat pharmaceutical executives and insurers by cutting back his legislation to be a bare bones "emergency treatment" policy, with the intent not to totally "socialize" health care in this country but afford Americans then to visit their local insurance agent and sign up for supplemental coverage.
Sort of like Plan A or B supplements for the seniors, only privately obtained. And those supplemental plans will be also subject to increasing costs based upon claims as with the plans now offered, with the government plan as "primary," which will not kick in unless and until you have used the government benefits first, with the insurance industry then able to use the government as the scapegoat for denied treatments.
(2) Or Mr. Obama and Congress in the fine print of the bill will enter into public/private partnerships with the major insurance carriers in this country, and Big Labor privileges of adding in their profit and cut into the government contracts to the amounts which will be required to be withheld from employee/union member paychecks as "administration" fees, with the pharmaceutical industry perhaps being afforded longer patent rights for new medications retroactively and sums for promised grants for future research costs, especially since the embryonic stem cell bill now has been accorded them for their future profits also.
(NOTE: the patent for the original outrageously expensive drugs for AIDS which are used by and large still today expire in 2017, since litigation over ownership rights for the drugs began almost immediately after its "discovery" and have extended the patents on them already an additional 10 years since the patents don't begin until ownership is established, with two companies now sharing those profits since the case was subsequently settled in the early 90's).
The lives of Americans, and especially the large baby boomer generation, are now being bargained for between the insurers, pharmaceutical industries, and big labor.
And I wonder just what recourse will be included for citizens if denied treatment, or if there are any delays or negligence in the care received by government employed physicians and hospitals? What kind of shell game then might Americans face in attempting to redress those grievances between the bureaucrats, insurers, big labor and pharmaceutical companies playing "Whose on first?"
Another take:
http://www.getbetterhealth.com/tag/galen-institute
Gee, I wonder if in this instance as in others whether following our Constitution might be a better idea, and break up the "associations" of these large industries in order to facilitate a truly free market once again, and get Big Labor out of the insurance and health care business which they had no right to enter into in the first place.
Maybe simply beginning to perform their Constitutional function in regulating and overseeing both the type of plans sold at either federal or state levels depending on carrier customer base and home office location.
For accountability, then funding a centralized complaint department for the American citizens to utilize which might be a better useage of those stimulus monies instead of what is going to become another Lawyers Employment Act in its violation of citizens privacy rights with that concocted national health care database for citizens medical information for the feeder industries and states nefarious purposes in the interest of "public unsafety."
I foresee such a bureaucratic administrative nightmare in the end will result in eventually putting small business physicians and software providers out of work, and ultimately increase costs due to government fees and costs which will be tacked on to the patients bills in order utilize that huge mistake-in-the-making system to store and transfer patient records, even if the correct records get transferred. Just imagine the potential lawsuits for unauthorized, misused or incorrect information.
Maybe what we need to do here is step back a moment and look at the legal and "long view."
What a novel idea.
Although these three industries are not in any way directly tied to patient care and delivery, it appears Mr. Obama is playing diplomat with this issue and appeaser with these industry leeches in order that they don't lose a piece of their pie under any anticipated governmental program.
Under Obama's plan, it is estimated that approximately 119 million Americans would shift from private insurance to the governmental plan, putting America on the path toward a completely government run socialized health care system. This, of course, would not sit well with the private insurance carriers who would stand to not only lose business, but their very shirts and the jobs of many who are currently hawking those policies to private businesses and individuals.
The pharmaceutical industry, of course, is quite concerned because under any government plan generics and other effective lower cost drugs (think penicillin and cheaper antibiotics) on which there isn't as much profit would most likely be the preferred and "authorized" treatment with Uncle Sam picking up the tab.
Many of those drug company representatives peddling their "new and improved" wares to doctors would also lose their jobs in the process, and a few of those free bonus trips, and the physicans and health care providers a few holiday gifts.
The unions earned their seat at the appeasement table due to the fact that any government plan would impact Big Labor and their own health care plans which have their administrative mark ups also built in which would, most likely, be negotiated away during the next collective bargaining session.
Mr. Obama during his campaigns assured the American people that the governmental plan he was proposing would simply be an "alternate," with Americans then able to make a choice between the government plan or retaining their own private carriers.
What was left unsaid, however, is that most private insurance is not bought by individuals in this country, but by their Big Business employers. Employers who have shareholders to answer to, and are now facing economic woes of their own throughout many major industries due to this Washington precipitated economic meltdown.
Just how long do you think those employers will keep those group plans once the government plan undercuts them?
What also was left unsaid is that the Obama plan also intends to parent America's children and youth, and mandate that parents must insure their children and themselves, and also feed Washington in providing fines and fees for non-compliance.
In other words, another non-consensual tax in the making that, if Medicare and Medicaid are any indication, will be used for other "discretionary" purposes and be an unaccountable bottomless pit of taxation.
I look for this scenario to go one of two ways:
(1) Mr. Obama will continue in his role as appeaser to all with the exception of Joe Citizen, and will attempt to placate the union bosses and fat cat pharmaceutical executives and insurers by cutting back his legislation to be a bare bones "emergency treatment" policy, with the intent not to totally "socialize" health care in this country but afford Americans then to visit their local insurance agent and sign up for supplemental coverage.
Sort of like Plan A or B supplements for the seniors, only privately obtained. And those supplemental plans will be also subject to increasing costs based upon claims as with the plans now offered, with the government plan as "primary," which will not kick in unless and until you have used the government benefits first, with the insurance industry then able to use the government as the scapegoat for denied treatments.
(2) Or Mr. Obama and Congress in the fine print of the bill will enter into public/private partnerships with the major insurance carriers in this country, and Big Labor privileges of adding in their profit and cut into the government contracts to the amounts which will be required to be withheld from employee/union member paychecks as "administration" fees, with the pharmaceutical industry perhaps being afforded longer patent rights for new medications retroactively and sums for promised grants for future research costs, especially since the embryonic stem cell bill now has been accorded them for their future profits also.
(NOTE: the patent for the original outrageously expensive drugs for AIDS which are used by and large still today expire in 2017, since litigation over ownership rights for the drugs began almost immediately after its "discovery" and have extended the patents on them already an additional 10 years since the patents don't begin until ownership is established, with two companies now sharing those profits since the case was subsequently settled in the early 90's).
The lives of Americans, and especially the large baby boomer generation, are now being bargained for between the insurers, pharmaceutical industries, and big labor.
And I wonder just what recourse will be included for citizens if denied treatment, or if there are any delays or negligence in the care received by government employed physicians and hospitals? What kind of shell game then might Americans face in attempting to redress those grievances between the bureaucrats, insurers, big labor and pharmaceutical companies playing "Whose on first?"
Another take:
http://www.getbetterhealth.com/tag/galen-institute
Gee, I wonder if in this instance as in others whether following our Constitution might be a better idea, and break up the "associations" of these large industries in order to facilitate a truly free market once again, and get Big Labor out of the insurance and health care business which they had no right to enter into in the first place.
Maybe simply beginning to perform their Constitutional function in regulating and overseeing both the type of plans sold at either federal or state levels depending on carrier customer base and home office location.
For accountability, then funding a centralized complaint department for the American citizens to utilize which might be a better useage of those stimulus monies instead of what is going to become another Lawyers Employment Act in its violation of citizens privacy rights with that concocted national health care database for citizens medical information for the feeder industries and states nefarious purposes in the interest of "public unsafety."
I foresee such a bureaucratic administrative nightmare in the end will result in eventually putting small business physicians and software providers out of work, and ultimately increase costs due to government fees and costs which will be tacked on to the patients bills in order utilize that huge mistake-in-the-making system to store and transfer patient records, even if the correct records get transferred. Just imagine the potential lawsuits for unauthorized, misused or incorrect information.
Maybe what we need to do here is step back a moment and look at the legal and "long view."
What a novel idea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
