I have had a number of emails asking for a brief synopsis of what we can expect with Obamacare. Some just don't feel like reading through all the bureaucratic red tape.
Here ya go.
Curtsy to FightBackWisconsin.
The health care plan text can be found at HERE.
FACTS:
• 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 and benefits you
get.
• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for
you.
• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare
services.
• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all
individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer
health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to
participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare
Exchange (i.e., 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.
• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run
public plan. No alternatives.
• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND
their families.
• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer
the 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 doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare (according to
the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare 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."
• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor
most affected."
• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the
same.
• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment,
etc.
• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private
healthcare industries.
• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
wheelchairs.
• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems
preventable re-admissions.
• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results
in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in
healthcare companies!
• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without
government approval.
• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input.
• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures:
i.e., rationing.
• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans,
HMOs, etc.
• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by
phone).
• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens,
assisted suicide, euthanasia?
• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable
powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory.
• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding
you in death.
• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment;
government dictates how your life ends.
• 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.
• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at
end-of-life.
• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy.
• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and
rationing those services.
29 comments:
With all due respect, your "Facts" are BS.
I downloaded the PDF of the bill. Let's take a look:
Page 22 talks about a study that needs to be done of "large group insured and self-insured employer health care markets", which will look at various factors to understand the market. This is not a (spooky) audit that is mandated of all self-insurers.
Page 29 says nothing about rationing (indeed, the word "ration" doesn't even appear once in the 1017 pages of the bill!!). This talks about limits of cost-sharing. If you can explain to me how that equals "rationing", I'm all ears.
Page 30 notes the creation of the "Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans". This is NOT a government committee deciding what treatments you get, but the SAME as how your current insurance company decides what benefits you receive. This is why everyone CURRENTLY has a huge manual from their insurane provider listing what is covered and what isn't. Just, instead of your insurance company having a room full of people decided this, now the government will need a similar group. NO BIGGIE.
OK, so already your list is 0/3 on "truthiness".
I really urge you to become more educated before you simply pass along all the usual rhetoric and propaganda (as you seem to be doing a lot of lately).
Everything listed for pages 425-430 are similarly mischaracterized, if you actually read the Bill. The "order" is the doctor's orders that must reflect the patient's wishes. The health plan pays for one consultation every five years about the advance directives, IF the patient wants to discuss it with the doctor. There's nothing about the government making decisions for the patient or the doctor about the creation or use of advance directives.
But, frankly, Ginny, I don't really think you care.
Ginny Ginny Ginny. You are wrong again, but please, don't let facts get in the way of your homespun philosophy.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/euthanasia.asp
Dan B - Brooklyn, NY (formerly of West Bend)
All I know is that government run health care does not benefit anyone. I'd rather pay threw the nose out of my own pocket then have the government run my health care (or lack of care).
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2312491/posts?page=7
PG425 L22-25, 426 L1-3 Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death.
PG 427 Lines 15-24 Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The Government has a say in how your life ends.
PG 429 Lines 1-9 An “advance care planning consultant” will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates.
PG 429 Lines 10-12 “advance care consultation” may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from Government.
PG 429 Lines 13-25 The Government will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order. Logan’s Run anyone?
PG 430 Lines 11-15 The Government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.
PG 432 Lines 18-21 The Government will publish “quality measures” for individual’s end of life in Federal Register.
But, hey, go ahead and believe what you want...
Attack the bill, PLEASE, but at LEAST attack what is actually IN the bill. Cutting and pasting what amounts to Cliff's Notes prepared by a special interest group is pretty weak. Go read the bill for yourself, it's posted online in plenty of places.
West Bend Citizen: "PG 427 Lines 15-24 Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The Government has a say in how your life ends."
Ok, here is the text from lines 15-24 from page 427 of the bill:
15 [professionals] that (acting within the scope of the pro-
16 fessional’s authority under State law) may sign
17 orders for life sustaining treatment;
18 ‘‘(III) provides training for health care
19 professionals across the continuum of care
20 about the goals and use of orders for life sus-
21 taining treatment; and
22 ‘‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stake-
23 holders includes representatives from emergency
24 medical services, emergency department [physicians]
Tell me where in these lines does it say the government mandates program for orders for end of life or that the government has a say in how your life ends.
@11:18AM Anon - Thanks for posting that. What did it take, 30 seconds to find the actual text from the bill? It's much easier for these people to simply forward propaganda form their inbox to their entire address book than spending 30 seconds to research the facts.
Using a link FROM MY LOCAL LIBRARY, I found a slightly different version of the bill with slightly different pagination. You can download it from the House of Representatives website here: docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
In this file, page 427 has this text in lines 15-24, which appears to be what Ms. Maziarka's post was referring to:
(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that—
(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment
Seems to merely be definitional in nature, and, as noted above, not at all saying what she thinks it does.
Regardless of how you want to interpret the bill, this man is Obama's healthcare advisor(reason enough to be concerned):
Ezekiel Emanuel: Death to Those With Dementia, as Useless Eaters
July 21, 2009 (LPAC)-- Ezekiel Emanuel, the top healthcare adviser at Obama's Budget Office and brother of his chief of staff, believes it is "obvious" that people with Alzheimer's or other forms of dementia (estimated as one of three people who live beyond the age of 65) should be denied health-care, since they are "irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens." An essay published in the Hastings Center Report (Nov-Dec 1996) by Emanuel, Norman Daniels and Bruce Jennings, says in part:
"This civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good provides both procedural and substantive insights for developing a just allocation of health care resources. Procedurally, it suggests the need for public forums to deliberate about which health services should be considered basic and should be socially guaranteed. Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity - those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberation - are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Conversely, services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia."
Anonymous, this is a classic use of out of context quotation to make an argument, without the benefit of fully understand why something was said.
The quotation you provided indeed notes that "services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed".
Yet, according to the snippet you provided, this appears to be a summary of how following the "civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good" as one's particular political philosophical framework would deal with distributing health care benefits.
There is NO INDICATION, however, that his is actually Emanuel's belief or the way HE would approach the problem. The quote acknowledges it provides insights, but perhaps the very next sentence says something like "But this simple of a calculus would be unconscionable".
Do you really know what his thinking on the topic is, or are you, just like our host here, merely repeating the same rhetoric to try to fuel a fire.
I really wish people would become more educated about issues before blathering on about them. Really.
Most of your assertions are inane. Spend more time in a library, and your reading comprehension may improve.
Our current system brutally and unjustly rations care. It seems like conservatives want to scare us with their fantasies, and completely ignore what the people in front of their faces are experiencing.
Families with special needs children are more often than not driven into bankruptcy, since they have to be poor enough for Medicaid to get care. People in critical condition are driven extraordinary distances to find a hospital willing to take them. Small businesses are put out of business by health care costs.
And conservatives tell us to ignore all of this, and get scared of 'death panels'. Ridiculous.
So all those people against 'government health care'--should we end Medicare?
Why are the rates of satisfaction with Medicare so much higher than satisfaction with health insurance?
You're actually citing FreeRepublic as backup? The site known for pushing the 'Obama isn't actually president' lunacy? The favorite haunt of the Holocaust Museum shooter and a shocking number of white supremacists?
Really?
In case your curious--freerepublic is a site normally blocked by internet filters installed in libraries. Just so you know the quality of your sources...
OK, I looked through these, and most of them are just out and out lies. Like the one that says non-US citizens will be offered free healthcare? And this is supposed to be on page 50? Can you give me the actual text on that Ginny, because the only thing I can find on page 50 that's even REMOTELY close to that statement is:
'all health care and related services(including insurance coverage and public health activities)covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services.'
Umm. Quite a stretch, there.
And the claim that the government will pay Acorn and Americorp to dessiminate information? This is the actual text:
"The Commissioner shall provide for the broad dissemination of information on Exchange participating health benefits plans offered under this title. Such information shall be provided in a comparative manner, and shall include information on benefits, premiums, cost-sharing, quality, provider networks, and consumer satisfaction."
Once again, so much of a stretch that it can be called nothing more than a bold-faced lie.
Ginny, you hold yourself up as a moral person. Do you not realize the morality of truthfulness? Do you not think twice about telling blatant untruths?
I'm a new reader to this blog. Apparently Ginny doesn't respond well to "facts" huh?
It certainly is curious how whenever people push back on these claims with arguments based on facts, we're met with silence....
Here is what is curious..
That people think I sit at my computer all day, like Concerned Citizen of West Bend does. I have a life. I have a family. I have a job. I have priorities. I don't sit and wait all day for comments to come in. If I don't have time to respond in the manner I feel is appropriate, I simply don't.
Marj,
You can toy with the words. You can play and twist. We all know the bottom line. This bill reaks of government control. Sneaky..but we are not fooled.
And Marj, I will ask you politely to refrain from personal attacks. Thanks!
Once again, Ginny doesn't actually respond when presented with facts. What a surprise. She calls being presented with facts "playing and twisting" the words.
This makes sense I guess: "If I don't have time to respond in the manner I feel is appropriate, I simply don't." With all the time in the world she still couldn't make any sense.
Actually, Ginny, I wasn't toying with words. I was citing the actual text, and I am not sure how that constitutes toying
I would say it is DEFINITELY your list that was toying, distorting, and outright misrepresenting words.
And Ginny, your admonitions against personal attacks would carry more weight if you did not so constantly engage in personal attacks against others.
I was just standing up for morality, and stating that lying is wrong. Do you disagree? Or is there nothing at all wrong with saying things that are absolutely untrue?
And while I'm at it:
"This bill reaks of government control."
Why does that bother you Ginny? You like government control when it comes to libraries apparently... why not healthcare? Surely the people in charge know best how our health care should be administered just like you know best what books my child should be exposed to.
Dan, Since you already claimed being a former Bender, your input regarding what I think concerning the WB Library means 0 to me. The library where you live may be meet your nice liberal community standards. Hey, if that's the way you like it...enjoy. You, sir, do NOT have a stake in my community.
MLIS:
Silence is golden, don'tcha know?
Righteousness needs no defense.
"Dan, Since you already claimed being a former Bender, your input regarding what I think concerning the WB Library means 0 to me. The library where you live may be meet your nice liberal community standards. Hey, if that's the way you like it...enjoy. You, sir, do NOT have a stake in my community."
Huh? I haven't given you any opinion on the WB Library situation. We are talking about the health.... God, why even bother. You won't answer anyway. What color is the sky in your world?
"You like government control when it comes to libraries apparently... why not healthcare? Surely the people in charge know best how our health care should be administered just like you know best what books my child should be exposed to."
Short-term memory, Dan?
I don't really think you know what you are talking about Dan. Really, I don't.
Right, that's your opinion, not mine. You should run for office... you can avoid answering questions as good as any politician.
I pray for you Ginny.
Pg. 21-22 MANDATES a government audit of the books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self-insure in order to “ensure that the law does not provide incentives for small and mid-size employers to self-insure."
Pg. 29, Lines 4-16 - YOUR HEALTH CARE WILL BE RATIONED.
Pg. 30, THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE deciding what treatments and benefits you get.
Pgs. 425-430:
Pg. 425, Lines 4-12 - Government mandates Advance (Death) Care Planning consultation. Think Senior Citizens and end of life. END-OF-LIFE COUNSELING. SOME IN THE ADMINISTRATION HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED RATIONING HEALTH CARE FOR THE ELDERLY.
Pg. 425, Lines 17-19 - Government WILL instruct and consult regarding living wills and durable powers of attorney. Mandatory end-of-life planning.
Pg. 425-426, Lines 22-25, 1-3 - Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
Pg. 427, Lines 15-24 - Government mandates program for orders for life-sustaining treatment (i.e. end of life). The government has a say in how your life ends.
Pg. 429, Lines 1-9 - An “advanced care planning consult” will be used as patient’s health deteriorates.
Pg. 429, Lines 10-12 - “Advanced Care Consultation” may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans - from the government.
Pg. 429, Lines 13-25 - The government will specify which Doctors (professional authority under state law includes Nurse Practitioners or Physician’s Assistants) can write an end-of-life order.
Pg. 430, Lines 11-15 - The government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life, according to preset methods (not individually decided).
I'm sure Liberty Counsel is full of propaganda and deceit. But then again, it depends what side of the fence you are on.
http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf
I strongly urge you to read and consider what is talked about in this article:
"False ‘Death Panel’ Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/health/policy/14panel.html?hp
Post a Comment