The Health Care Bill, as it stands, is 1018 pages long and as Conyers said,
“What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”
REALLY, Conyers? How about you resign and we get someone who’s willing to do the job he was elected to do, like READ bills!
I did skim through the monstrosity. One section that caught my eyes and made them bleed was Section 1173A, STANDARDIZE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS. (Page 59 for the brave who want to make their eyes bleed, too.)
This section explains how our brilliant government is going to go to a National Computerized Health Records System to cut down on paperwork and errors by requiring everyone to utilize a National ID card. It also states that this National Computer System will be so clever it will be able to check your bank account in real-time at point of service. How’s THAT for technology!
I have a few problems with this technology though. But first, I want to hear all the Liberals screaming about the violation of our Constitutional Rights. You know, invasion of privacy, like they did when Bush wired taped Terrorist’s telephone calls. Because with THIS system every time you sneeze it’s going to be recorded. Not to mention you will be giving them your checking and savings account information in REAL TIME. If THAT’S not invasion of privacy, I don’t know what is. I find that MORE intrusive than Bush MAYBE wiring taping little ole Pamela’s boring phone calls in Pittsburgh. With this new system, the government WILL KNOW EVERYTHING about your personal health AND your PERSONAL finances in REAL TIME. Do I hear the outrage from the Left yet?
My other problem is this: Obama and the Democrats want everyone to support ObamaCare because they are so benevolent and wish for EVERYONE, including illegal aliens (read the bill) to have access to FREE health care, right? Well…not really free…they are going to raise taxes to pay for it, so some will get it for free while others will pay through the nose. That makes a lot of people get tingles up their legs, I’m sure. Tax those EVIL rich people! TAX THEM! TAX THEM GOOD!
According to Section 1173A:
Enable the real-time (or near real time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service.
They want access to our bank accounts at point of service to determine our ability to pay.
WAIT!
WHAT?
I thought some of us were paying MORE in taxes for health care so that ALL our fellow Americans could benefit from ObamaCare. Why would they need to see our affordability at point of service if we’re already paying extra taxes?
See, they are LYING…AGAIN. Not only will we be paying higher taxes, but they will take any money we have sitting in our bank accounts, too. MORE taxes AND our banks accounts!
Don’t take my word for it. Don’t even read the bill. Why bother. After all, you only need to be a damn lawyer to understand 90% of it! Just continue to believe Obama and the Democrats who are telling you this bill is good for the people, good for the deficit, and good for the country; when in reality it’s good for NOTHING.
I am in total agreement that our health care has gotten way out of hand. But Government run Health Care is NOT the answer. And, folks, this IS Government run health care, with a Health Benefits Advisory Committee and a Health Choice Commissioner all appointed by the President. It’s something we can NOT afford. In fact, I think it would be disastrous to our economy, our privacy and our lives. It’s time people woke up, read this monstrous 1,000 page bill, or at least tried to, and saw it for what it REALLY is-An avenue toward socialism, a loss of privacy, and a road toward total destruction of our already fragile economy.
Obama SAID he was going to TRANSFORM America. I believed him, did you?
One day a poor pregnant woman came to A conservative republican.
ReplyDelete“Oh, wise one” cried the woman. “My husband was killed in an auto accident. I am an illegal alien. I cannot support this child in my belly. I want to have an abortion. ”
The Conservative gazed upon the poor woman and replied “No. Woman. God loves every child..even the unborn. All human beings are created equal and are endowed at creation with certain fundamental rights among which is the right to life. Go and have your baby and forget about an abortion”
So the woman had her baby.
The baby was born gravely sick.
It needed a doctor and expensive medical care.
So the woman returned to the Conservative Republican
“Oh wise one. My baby is sick. But I am an illegal alien. My child needs expensive medical care. Can you help me.”
The Conservative lectured the woman sternly:
“You chose to come her illegally. If your child is sick and you cannot afford a doctor you have no one to blame but yourself. Your baby is not our responsibility. We want nothing to do with it. We only care for our own. Take that wretched child back to where ever you came from”
The newborn child died after much suffering
And then a second conservative said,
ReplyDelete"Next time, put a wrapper on that thing and you won't have children that need to be on the government dole to get healthcare."
Talk about a straw man scenario....
I am thinking Conyers might not know how to read.
ReplyDeleteA nice lady's husband lost his health insurance at work. Her and her husband can barely afford the private plan they had to buy. They then found out about treatments this plan doesn't cover, thus having to spend even more on health care than they can afford.
ReplyDeleteThis story sound familiar Bluepitbull?
I'm not standing up for the bill going through Congress. Pamela is correct. It's a monstrosity. Watered down by those who get big money donations from insurance companies to ensure their profits are protected. The passage of this ridiculous bill would be a false victory for those of us that support true reform of our health insurance system.
I'll defend single payer all night long.
Read it Folks, all you have to do is read it and you will see how bad it is for America.
ReplyDeleteHamster: I’m not quite sure I understand your post. I don’t want anyone to suffer, especially a child. However, I believe in charity at home FIRST. We have millions of LEGAL Americans who have lost their jobs, homes and are losing their health care. They need us now more than ever. If I’m going to help anyone, it’s THEM. If the illegals need help, then they need to go back to their own country and get help from THEIR government. It’s NOT our responsibility to support them. Now, if they want to come here LEGALLY, fine, but until then, NO.
ReplyDeleteBlue: Good point. If you can’t afford children, then don’t have any. I realize accidents happen, and that’s why we have government assistance for OUR citizens! NOT illegals.
Bob: He probably can’t. Maybe he needs an interpreter not a lawyer.
Truth: We know to whom you are referring. And yes, it sucks. That is why we need some kind of reform and I believe you and I are on the same page as far as NOT having government handle it. But how do we stop this disastrous bill from passing?
Wordsmith: Yes, people need to read it. However, it’s so complicated. These bills should be written so the average American CAN understand it! Even Conyers admitted he needs 2 lawyers to comprehend the darn thing!
Let's all be honest about these bills that Congress passes. They're hundreds, if not thousands of pages long. No one person is going to read and comprehend the whole thing. They probably need to be long to encompass all they are trying to accomplish. But a thousand pages? I concede the ridiculousness of that.
ReplyDeleteThe ultimate answer is right under our noses and both political parties will fight it despite what their platforms may declare: Term limits.
The ultimate answer is right under our noses and both political parties will fight it despite what their platforms may declare: Term limits.
ReplyDeleteYou start the petition, Truth, and I’ll be the FIRST to sign it!
"I have a few problems with this technology though. But first, I want to hear all the Liberals screaming about the violation of our Constitutional Rights. You know, invasion of privacy, like they did when Bush wired taped Terrorist’s telephone calls. Because with THIS system every time you sneeze it’s going to be recorded. Not to mention you will be giving them your checking and savings account information in REAL TIME. If THAT’S not invasion of privacy, I don’t know what is."
ReplyDeleteDoesn't the Government (the IRS) already know how much money we have? We are mandated to give them that information each April 15.
I haven't read the bill [I've had nonstop company for one solid month-gasp.], but is there nothing in it that says this information would be voluntary?
PS. My parents were on Medicare--a government health care system--and it worked fine for them.
Shaw: Yes, we have to submit our yearly EARNINGS to the IRS once a year. The IRS doesn’t have access to our bank accounts in REAL TIME. That is the problem I have with this. It’s none of their business how much money I have in my bank accounts at any moment in time.
ReplyDeleteNo, there is nothing that says this would be voluntary, if there was I wouldn’t be so mad.
I know some people on Medicare, too, and they are okay with it. However, I can’t imagine our entire population being on a government managed plan! The government can’t read a 1000 page bill let alone manage something as important as our health! This issue is TOO important for the government to administer.
It's too important for insurance company executives to administer. Some things are too important to ley profit be the motivating factor. Public health is one of them. Single payer is the way to go.
ReplyDeleteI keep pounding away at all the horrible results that will come if this bill makes it into law.
ReplyDeleteThanks Pam for pointing out another horrible effect.
I don't see how anyone who will sit down and read even 20% of this monstrosity wouldn't want it canceled and burned.
Pamela, great post! I truly hope and pray that this bill does not go through. I haven't met anyone that agrees with it, liberal or conservative.
ReplyDeleteI don't mind admitting the story is about me, in fact I was thinking about doing a post about it. What ticks me off so much is that people trying to do the right thing always seem to be screwed over. Without sharing my life story here, right now we are trying to figure out which is more important our mortgage or insurance. That's one hell of a choice to make. And this is just one persons story, imagine how many just like me there are! It can't go on like this, but I know that this bill isn't the answer.
excellent piece Pam..LTNS!!
ReplyDeleteGive us a break, this is the worst BS I've read in years.
ReplyDeleteTruth: You’re right, profit shouldn’t be the only factor with this debate. But I’ll just bet there is a lot of profit, maybe not monetary, to be made in Congress, if this bill passes. Since when does Congress care about “the people?”
ReplyDeleteAblur: Hopefully MORE will read this monster. It’s long and complicated, but the only way the public will know the truth is if they actually read it. Once they do, they will see that the Left and Right are BOTH spinning this to their side and to their benefit NOT OURS.
Reverend: Another 1,000 page bill that gets passed without being read and I’m going to visit the Capitol Building myself! And I think there will be a long line of people behind me. These bills are horrendous. They need to be read and understood, not just by our Representatives, but by the American people, too.
Jennifer: I know you are trying to do the right thing and bless you for it. I admire you because you are going through hell, but yet you can still see that this bill is flawed, not just for you, but for our country.
Angel: Thanks! It’s an “Honor” to have you stop by!
Lynn: I highly doubt it’s the WORST BS in years. Give me some credit! Especially after I spent hours reading this bill, which is over 1,000 pages long that ANYONE can look up and verify! But, for your benefit, I’ve copied from the health care bill where it says it will check our bank account in REAL TIME. You may also click the link I’ve provided in my post and read the bill yourself. Trust me, it’s a very boring read.
‘‘(2) GOALS FOR FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.—The goals for standards under paragraph (1) are that such standards shall—‘‘(A) be unique with no conflicting or redundant standards; ‘‘(B) be authoritative, permitting no additions or constraints for electronic transactions, including companion guides;‘‘(C) be comprehensive, efficient and robust, requiring minimal augmentation by paper transactions or clarification by further communications; ‘‘(D) enable the real-time (or near real-time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card; ‘‘(E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims; ‘‘(F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary; ‘‘(G) describe all data elements (such as reason and remark codes) in unambiguous terms, not permit optional fields, require that data elements be either required or conditioned upon set values in other fields, and prohibit additional conditions; and ‘‘(H) harmonize all common data elements across administrative and clinical transaction standards.
So, as I asked in my blog, why does the government want to determine our financial responsibility when we are supposedly paying for health care via taxes? And why do they need access to our personal financial records in REAL TIME? I didn’t even get into the part where it says including whether an individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility. Aren’t we all supposed to be eligible for health care? Isn’t that the reason for this reform, so that no one is denied? But in the above paragraph it is stating that they can deny an individual based on finances. Or how about, provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary. Which sounds a lot like they will be giving themselves the authority to electronically transfer money from bank accounts.
If someone reads this and finds I’m amiss, please advise.
This can be found on page 59 of the bill, as I stated in my blog. Please read it and let me know what YOU think!
THEY WANT OUR BANK ACCOUNTS? THat will BE THE DARNED DAY, Pam..that will BE THE DAY.
ReplyDeleteSingle Payer is the one system that's been an abject failure as far as actual CARE is concerned. My goodness..Canada, England; single payer. Nightmares. Rationing...etc.
Our own doctor is a lib who voted for Obama and he's now screeching "WHY AREN'T THE REPUBLICANS STOPPING THIS?!" I couldn't BELIEVE it. He finally woke up?
Hamster's story is just silly; everyone DOES get treated here, well, not EVERYONE, but illegals with no money do...time and time again. NOT US, not we who pay through the NOSE and STILL have to reach our deductible before WE get help. WE'd have to sell our house to get care, the illegal pregnant woman? NO PROBLEMO. FREEEE> I've seen it time and time again.
Here's the rub; I'm so SICK and tired of leftwingers suggesting CONSERVATIVES don't want people to have health care! What, you think we HATe that poor pregnant woman in Hermit's scenario? WHY? SINCE WHEN? HAS the media been honest about presenting what those media-unsavvy but smart Conservatives are proposing? SILENCE, the media wants THE ONE'S PLAN, even if they haven't read it...scum
Small bus. co-ops....The left says NO...it wasn't on OUR list of things.
ONLY fixing it for those without insurance?... the left says NOT EXPENSIVE ENOUGH
$5K to each person to help with their payments? Too wise, can't have THAT, right?
Ugh..I could go on and on but what's the point.
Odd, isn't it, that Americans were saying that they were happy with their care to the tune of 80% until this talk really got going and aspects of the plan are actually getting TO the public? it's now 90% who say they're happy...sure! Becuase they do NOT want OBAMA CARE. THANK GOD.
FIX THE PROBLEM, DO NOT OVERHAUL and hurt US.
FIX THE ECONOMY, don't BUY COMPANIES, it's unAmerican.
FIX things...we don't need this much CHANGE.
I think there is a whole lot of over reaction here...
ReplyDeleteBasically, now, when you go to the doctor the doctor has no clue (unless he has a real sophisficated computer system, to know what he is going to be paid by what insurance companies. My doctor bills 200.00 of an office visit but my insurance company only pays 86.00 so he ends up writing off the balance due after subtracting my doctor visit copay.
What the regulation proposes is for healthcare people and consumers to know exactly what they are going to get paid and or be responsible for paying right on the spot rather than having to wait months for the insurance company EOB (Explanation of Benefits).
Lots of Dental Insurance companies and Dentists already do this. When I go to my dentist he already knows what my deductiable balance is and what the insurance company is going to pay for the services he has scheduled that day and when I leave he has a check from me for what I will owe; its real time and he is paid in full at the completion of the visit.
That is what this whole part of the bill is trying to accomplish.
It has nothing to do about accessing your checking account. If they can get this thing off the ground (and I give them AT BEST a 25% chance) then doctors will know what the insurance company is going to pay and what they have to get from you at the end of your office visit. No more deadbeats, no more screwed up bills and waiting for months for payment from insurance companies....
Now, YOU will need to know what is in your checking account because the luxury of waiting for a bill from the doctor and waiting for the doctor to get paid by the insurance company and then waiting months to clean up all the billing errors are over....
Wishful thinking.....but it is a good idea.
But your checking accounts are safe from preying eyes....
My dentist even has a deal where if I pay both my part and the insurance part by the time I leave his office I get a 10% discount and then when the insurance company pays he sends me a refund check for the over payment.
I hope my doctor is as smart....
Do any of you know how long it takes for insurance companies to pay for the medical care that you receive or how many hoops that doctors have to jump through for each and every insurance they accept?
Z: I know a few people who are having buyer’s remorse too.
ReplyDeleteOur health care system is in dire need of an over-haul, no doubt. But government running yet another major system is ludicrous. We don’t need more intrusion in our lives; more over-site, more rules and regulations. Medicare is almost bankrupt and Medicaid has more theft than our government can keep up with. Another socialized program is not the way.
Tao: I’m in total agreement that it’s a lot more efficient and less costly for doctors and dentists to be able to check in “real time” a patient’s insurance eligibility for services. The paperwork alone has caused costs to skyrocket. The doctor charges one price, the insurance companies have a “going rate” and then the doctor gets paid a different amount, depending on your insurance plan. My dentist has the same ability as yours and it makes things less complicated. You know right there whether your insurance is going to cover the service, how much and if you want to come back to have it done. My husband just went through this last week with his check-up and cleaning. Our Dentist wants him to have some scaling done and they checked to see if our insurance would cover the procedure. It does, so my husband made the appointment on the spot. My dentist is also known to cut the cost of procedures if you pay cash. I think a lot of doctors and dentists will do this. All you have to do is ask.
As far as the REAL TIME in this health care bill is concerned; I see what you’re saying. However, if it is the insurance company they are checking, then why does it read an “individual?” And again, we are all supposed to be covered, so there shouldn’t be any financial responsibility on anyone’s part, right? We go to the doctor or hospital and we should get taken care of because it’s being paid for by taxes. The wording is quite confusing.
I know what “hoops” doctors have to jump through. It’s horrible. The insurance companies call the shots and the doctors have no say. They accept what the insurance company says and that’s that. The doctors really don’t have a choice unless they want to opt out of accepting said insurance carrier, but then they would lose a lot of patients. It’s like a big game. But it’s really only win win for the insurance companies.
Well, I suspsect it says 'individual' because it will be our policy and our healthcare 'account' and thus they are treating it individually.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think the first thing they should sit down and do is overhaul the whole CPT code system for precedures and all that.
We just made one simple change to our existing insurance at work and you would think that we changed the whole policy and switched to a totally different company. I have employees who are getting bills kicked back unpaid because the insurance company wants proof they had prior coverage! So, you gotta call the insurance company and say, yes I had coverage and it was with you and then they want you to send them proof! :)
Our real reform should have been to deal with insurance carrier first and clean them up...but they won't allow THAT to happen so now we have to go through this whole mess rather than solve the real problem.
I think paying healthcare professionals for treatment rather than a per service basis might have been worth talking about...but then that would cut down on the prescriptions that the drug companies can count on....
I do like the centralized database of treatment options is a great idea because the knowledge of healthcare professionals is so all over the board...
But you gotta take the good with the bad...and hope that the benefit of the good outweighs the cost of the bad...
It would be nice to believe that insurance companies and healhtcare professionals could sit down and improve their own product without government but sometimes 'too big to fail' also translates to 'too big to change'
So we can all list horror stories about our dealings with insurance companies. But that's better than everyone being covered under one system with one set of rules?
ReplyDeleteWe aren't saying let the illegals die but they can't get medical help. We're saying ship their asses back home, preferably BEFORE they get sick! The process should ALREADY be underway!!
ReplyDeletePoint #2
If this bullshit plan is so damned good, why aren't our politicians going to be part of it? Why is it good enough for us but NOT for them? I'll tell you why. IT ISN'T!!!!!
Be afraid, be very afraid.
ReplyDeleteWell, to speak against Obama’s ideas is blasphemy. To question or point our anything he says is racism. His middle name is off limits and cannot be uttered. The statements of his wife, are forbidden to be analyzed. We may not discuss Obama’s mother, father, his 20 years in Jeremiah Wright’s church, his criminal and terrorist associates, his lack of patriotism, what he wrote in his books, what he said yesterday. Not even the Pope in Rome is afforded such insulation. But as Obama becomes the Vicar of Marx, I suppose looking at the histories of Communist and Socialist nations – blasphemy against the State and it’s Annointed is unwise
ReplyDeleteWake me up when your feeling better.
ReplyDeleteI think that by the time some of these dummies wake up, it might be too late.
ReplyDeleteBefore the end of this month, at leasdt two more of you will be in the same predicament one of our most popular bloggers is in. And I can safely predict, you will ask what will the government do about this.
ReplyDeleteThe change to a single payer system is necessary for our Nation to compete in the world. Our employers can't afford to provide health insurance and still compete with foreign companies that don't. We are all Americans. None of us, no matter how tough we like to sound, wants a fellow American to suffer without treatment because he/she can't afford medical care when needed.
I've been blogging and advocating for national health insurance for two years. The first post I did at my old site generated over a thousand hits and over 100 comments in one day. Most of them were rational and offered good suggestions from public/private partnerships. Tax credits. My single payer ideas and a few others. Since then the discussion has gone from people that saw a problem and offered ideas, to what we see now. Name calling and wild accusations about socialism and the "death of America." Yet we all agree that we need to rebuild how we make health care affordable and available to all Americans.
National health insurance won't b the death of America. America is more likely to die a slow, painful death due to the constant bickering between people that agree on the end result but can't get over labels.
I will be happy and proud to raise the level of discourse when we all lift ourselves up.
Thanks for the forum Pamela. You amaze me with your ability to keep a cool head when the rest of us are not.
TRUTH 101 said...
ReplyDelete"Before the end of this month, at leasdt two more of you will be in the same predicament one of our most popular bloggers is in. And I can safely predict, you will ask what will the government do about this."
Hey LAP DOG, your Master Shaw would be very pissed at you if see saw that you miss-spelled "leasdt
LMAO... shame, shame..
What are you picking on me for Blogless? I could care less about typos. Or has Shaw busted your insignificant balls to a point that you can't take it anymore?
ReplyDeleteBlogger TRUTH 101 said...
ReplyDeleteWhat are you picking on me for Blogless? I could care less about typos. Or has Shaw busted your insignificant balls to a point that you can't take it anymore?
Right.....
He has a great point, truth. He is comparing the moral equivalency that you and shaw have shown in the past. She has commented at length on others grammatical errors while at the same time you both throw out all sorts of accusations against the previous administration and at the same time attacking conservatives and apologizing for the obama administration.
This health care bill needs to fail. We need intra-state insurance competition, tort reform, and perhaps a little more personal responsibility in taking care of ourselves.
Pamela, my next-door neighbor is a professor of healthcare management at a nearby university and a distinguished author of several textbooks in the field. Last night over dinner, I asked him about the language of the text cited herein, and he stated that your interpretation is a misreading of the bill.
ReplyDeleteWhat Section 1173A covers are standard operating procedures within the industry. Right now when you fill out paperwork to establish yourself with a primary care physician, you sign several documents covering privacy and disclosure rights, service eligibility, plus a statement of financial responsibility (i.e. who will be responsible for paying out-of-network or out-of-scope bills.). None of these documents ask for your bank account number, nor do they state anything about “real-time [bank transaction] at point of service.”
Inasmuch as Section 1173A merely duplicates current SOPs, you misread the language and immediately jump into straw man arguments about invasion of privacy and violation of Constitutional rights. Even more incredible, you launch into some weird ideation about wire tapping telephones, accessing personal bank accounts, and political dissembling with no logical connection or empirical evidence to connect these thoughts.
Knowing in advance that we are opposite sides of this issue, I never expected you to support this bill but I did expect, at minimum, better scholarship, not this outright exercise in scare mongering, rabble-rousing, and deception. To be perfectly blunt, I am disappointed.
On Page 425 of Obama's health care bill, the Federal Government will require EVERYONE who is on Social Security to undergo a counseling session every 5 years with the objective being that they will explain to them just how to end their own life earlier. Yes... They are going to push SUICIDE to cut Medicare spending!!! And no, I am NOT KIDDING YOU! So those of you who voted for Obama have now put yourself and your own parents in dire straights... Congratulations!
ReplyDeleteRight is Right: “On Page 425 of Obama's health care bill, the Federal Government will require EVERYONE who is on Social Security to undergo a counseling session every 5 years with the objective being that they will explain to them just how to end their own life earlier. Yes... They are going to push SUICIDE to cut Medicare spending!!! And no, I am NOT KIDDING …”
ReplyDeleteHere is what Page 425 says:
“ An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.”
For your information, the operant words are “explanation and “practitioner.” Since when is an “explanation” considered to be a “mandate?” How is the word “practitioner” construed to mean “government?” Where does it state: “counseling every 5 years?” Where does the document “push suicide?”
Either you have a serious reading comprehension problem, or you are deliberately misreading texts for the purpose of scare mongering, rabble-rousing, and deception.
Current standard operating procedures for end-of-life care INCLUDE counseling that covers ALL options and services available such as pain management, hospice care and … yes … living wills.
Why living wills? Because WITHOUT a living will, you will be sticking YOUR nose into MY personal family business, such as when YOUR president and YOUR Republican Congress insinuated itself into the Terry Schiavo case.
When people lie, either in person or online, I have no basis to trust them, and that means you.
Octo: I’m sorry if you don’t think my arguments are valid. I believe they are. I compared the wire tapping to the electronic medical records, because as far as I’m concerned having all my medical records in a National Data base is an invasion of privacy. It’s one thing to have MY doctor use a computer, it’s quite another to have the government know what’s going on with my health.
ReplyDeleteNow, I may have been mistaken about the “real time” regarding an individual but I don’t think I was mistaken about the bank accounts. Please read this and tell me what you think:
‘‘(E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims;
‘‘(F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary;
‘‘(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice;
IF I am reading these statements correctly, then once an individual’s financial responsibility has been determined, the secretary can then decide to settle (adjudicate) the claim if he/she deems feasible by use of ANY electronic transaction he/she deems appropriate. Well, what if the secretary “deems” that transferring funds electronically from my bank account is “feasible” to “adjudicate” the claim?
Octo, you and I have always been respectful to one another and have had a great blogging relationship. So, I’m quite saddened that you would think I would stoop to “scare tactics” and “fear-mongering.” I thought you knew me better than that. I believe we all write in a way that entices others to read our work; however, I don’t lie and I don’t try to scare anyone. I have been reading this bill and I truly want to give the correct information. And as I stated in my comment to Lynn, if I’m amiss, please let me know. I still stand by that statement.
Advance Care Planning Consultation
ReplyDelete1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the
term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:
‘‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.
‘‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
‘‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
‘‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).
‘‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the range of end-of-life services and supports available, including soothing care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.
Section 425 states that an individual gets a consultation with a health care provider if the individual hasn’t had a consultation within 5 years. I haven’t found anything that states it’s mandatory. I don’t have a problem with offering this service, because there are a lot of people out there who haven’t planned for their “end of life.” I have a will, a living will and a living trust for my 2 minor children. So, I don’t want or need any consulting services, whether it’s within 5 years or 20. I don’t like that the “services” they provide are all State and National. There is no mention of an individual having the freedom to choose their own service provider, like their church or a charitable organization. I think those options should be mentioned. The state isn’t the only one to provide such services and the public should be made aware of ALL avenues, not just ones provided by our government.
From your quotation: ‘‘(E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims;
ReplyDelete‘‘(F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary;
‘‘(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice;
You seem to forget what insurers do: They PAY the physicians, hospitals, and other health service providers for their services. For some reason beyond me, you interpret this language as a vacuum cleaner into your pocketbook. This is another misreading and misinterpretation of the text.
Postscript: You want your own private insurance? FINE! You want your own personal physician? FINE! You want your own denomination involved in end-of-life decisions? FINE! There is nothing in this bill that prevents you! You are perfectly free to make your own choices.
ReplyDeleteBut get a handle on these statistics:
In 1993 when this issue was last debated, the insurance companies disbursed 95% of premium revenues on claims and distributed 5% to shareholders. Today, the same companies disburse 80% on claims and pocket 20%. That is a four-fold increase in retained revenues.
And this statistic: 25 years ago, the percentage of bankruptcies attributed to catastrophic healthcare expense was 8%. Today, the percentage is 60%.
As long as you have yours, do you actually care about what happens to other people? For instance: the 50+ million people who have no health coverage, and those who are under-insured?
This is a fundamental ethical and moral issue. Which side do you prefer to be on?
My goodness, there is a lot of hysterical misinformation being tossed about here!
ReplyDeleteBesides the other careers I dabble in, I've been a nurse for years so I have some understanding of what the portions of the bill being quoted here are ACTUALLY saying.
First, the whole bit about real time determination of your financial responsibility, etc is NOT "the government" digging into your financial business.
This is a clause to help inform and protect YOU! What is meant to happen is that you go to the doctor's and you have, say, back pain. Doc says you need an MRI, some blood work, whatever. You go to the hospital they enter all the data including your ins. number and they should be able to tell you in "real time" what is covered, what is not and EXACTLY how much said diagnostics are going to cost you above and beyond your insurance.
Wow, that is truly scary!
As for page 425 and the whole "they are going to push you to suicide drivel: Here is the irony of all the theatrical hysterics over page 425 - doctors and other healthcare professionals have been following this mandate for years; it is NOT a new concept.
I have participated in these conversations many times, with the elderly, the terminally ill and sometimes young, healthy people.
What has driven this dialogue is the vast strides technology has made in being able to keep our bodies alive longer but not always better.
I have had this conversation with my own doctor and I'm only in my 50s. But there are things I do not want done to prolong my body's life if I'm not able to participate in my life.
Can we at least TRY to have an intelligent conversation about health care reform without all the right wing disinformation?
‘‘(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice;"
ReplyDeleteIn all fairness, Pam - I'm not sure what they mean by this entry and would like a clear definition or scrap it completely.This particular item sounds like they mean to be able to deduct the payment automatically and I think that is something you should be able to work out on a case by case basis, depending on your situation.
I'm not in favor of rubber stamping this bill as is, but I think we have to stop all the rhetoric and look at this thing one piece at a time and evaluate the merits/demerits without pissing over political divides - it is so counter productive!
Rocky: Tao also explained the “real time” but he used his dentist as an example. (See the comments where he and I have discussed this and you will see that I am not at all hysterical, but very open to his explanation as I am from EVERYONE from ALL sides.) And Octo also said he spoke to a doctor friend and explained it here as well. It’s just that when I read “individual’s financial responsibility” it threw me off. I was under the impression that #1. Everyone was treated equally under the health care bill; those of us who are paying taxes will be paying more so that EVERYONE will have health care coverage. My question is why does anyone need to find out what anyone’s financial responsibility is going to be? And #2. The bill in this section also includes this statement: (E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims; ‘‘(F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary; It states plain as day that the secretary can use any electronic means that she/he deems necessary to settle claims. Any electronic transaction includes bank accounts, does it not?
ReplyDeleteAs far as Section 425, I never said I disagreed with it. I said I thought it was a GOOD idea. I only stated that I thought an individual should also be told that there are other options besides just Governmental.
I appreciate your input and Octo’s doctor friend as well. This bill is complicated at best and any information from health care professionals is most helpful. I’m not trying to make this difficult; I’m only trying to understand it. And as I said in my comment to Lynn, if I’m amiss, please let me know.
Octo: I NEVER once said that I didn’t want others to have health care coverage. I know they say I can keep my private insurance. But what does that have to do with me SUPPORTING Section 425 of the bill? I only stated that I wanted them to also inform individuals of the other services available to them. Governmental aren’t the ONLY services. That’s NOT being immoral or unethical. It’s giving individuals ALL options. That is being FAIR, as far as I’m concerned. Some people may not want to use a State service, but may feel more comfortable using an attorney. Each individual is different. That was my point. I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to forget what insurers do: They PAY the physicians, hospitals, and other health service providers for their services. For some reason beyond me, you interpret this language as a vacuum cleaner into your pocketbook. This is another misreading and misinterpretation of the text.
No, I didn’t forget that insurers pay. I think we’re all forgetting that this bill is complicated and written in a language that is ridiculous. Who talks like THAT? No one. If it were written in plain English it wouldn’t be 1,018 pages long. When reading it you have to refer to other sections, other bills and other acts just to understand what it all means. So, it’s very easy to misconstrue something. For example, when something reads:
any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary and it’s written under the section labeled “Financial Goals” and is speaking of an “individuals financial responsibility,”
what is one supposed to think? That is means something else? Or that it implies the secretary can utilize any electronic device to settle a debt? I didn’t write this monstrosity. I didn’t make up the terminology. I’m only trying to understand it. This particular section is nagging at me.
And because I am objectionable to ONE section of a 1,000+ bill, I get jumped on because the terminology is foggy at best. I said I didn’t like a National Data base for health records because I don’t want the government to have THAT kind of access to MY personal health and financial records and compared it to wire-tapping because in MY opinion it is an invasion of privacy. I was accused of fear-mongering and scare-tactics. I find that disheartening. When others have commented and tried to explain what they believed the terminology means, I have been open and respectful. Yet, you have been angry with me. I don’t understand this anger and hope we can come to an agreement.
Nancy Pelosi is a pathetic excuse for a human being much less the Speaker of the House. 6 million people died at the hands of the Nazi's and she invokes swastikas. This is a new low for the lowest of the low.I am ashamed that this person is the Speaker of the House. I can only hope that all of her comments, but especially this one, come back to haunt her forever.
ReplyDeletePamela: “And because I am objectionable to ONE section of a 1,000+ bill, I get jumped on …”
ReplyDeleteBut you also said this:
Pamela: “ it would be disastrous to our economy, our privacy and our lives (…) An avenue toward socialism, a loss of privacy, and a road toward total destruction of our already fragile economy.”
In other words, a string of empty assertions without evidence or proof. These past few days, I have been posting articles about the town hall hooligans who have been disrupting public meetings, harassing officials, shouting at citizens, and shutting down civil debate. Targeted politicians have been burned in effigy, and their offices have received telephone death threats.
My forbearers came to this country because their forbearers died in concentrations camps run by thugs who came to power employing these very same tactics. I never thought I would see the day when MY country got taken over by brownshirts! And you wonder why I am angry when I read your post and find the SAME paranoid ideations and empty rhetoric as employed by these town hall hooligans!
You make this assertion: “ ObamaCare [includes] illegal aliens (read the bill) … ”
This assertion is rabble-rousing and FALSE! The bill does NOT cover illegal aliens.
You make this assertion: “our brilliant government is going to go to a National Computerized Health Records System (…) to check your bank account in real-time at point of service.”
This assertion is rabble-rousing and FALSE! As Rockync explains (see comment above), the bill follows current standard operating procedures.
You make this assertion: “with THIS system [i.e. National Computerized Health Records System] every time you sneeze it’s going to be recorded.”
This assertion is rabble-rousing hyperbole. On this point I will elaborate:
In my adult life, I have moved at least 3 dozen times (including years abroad in places like Denmark, England, France and Germany). My childhood health records are LOST (including records of two hospitalizations). Records from my college years are LOST (one hospitalization). Many of the MDs who treated me during my lifetime are dead or “whereabouts unknown.” The only records still intact encompass the last 8 years.
Yet, for some inexplicable myopic reason, you refuse to acknowledge the benefit of preserving lifetime medical records … and the potential benefit in terms of preventive care.
In your myopic view, electronic medical records constitute an invasion of privacy; yet you are perfectly willing to trust a private corporation … that have had computers hacked, info stolen, that sell subscriber lists to third party marketing firms, that operate customer call centers in INDIA.
Has the IRS or the Social Security Administration ever mishandled your records, sold your mailing address to a direct response marketer, or shipped info overseas to a foreign call center?
Meanwhile, health insurers don’t need to get their hands dirty to protect their filthy greedy franchises. They hire lobbyists who do this dirty work, who recruit malcontents, nut jobs, and thugs to shut off public debate. These actions violate my rights and the rights of my children, my grandchildren, and future generations. Damn right I am angry!
Case in point: Violence at Tampa health care forum.
ReplyDeletePam, I think I need to clarify - while my second comment was addressed to you, my first comment was meant for the posters at large.
ReplyDeleteI'm frustrated with the fear mongering misinformation.
We all need to look at this bill and evaluate what is good and what is terrible.
Our records are already stored electronically in most places - like it or not, this is the future.
And this: "F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary;"
While this is pretty ambiguous, nowhere in "providing for timely acknowledgement, response and status reporting" do I see where the government or secretary is going to settle any claims.
Seems more like there will be a set of acceptable electronic transactions and that the provider will be responsible for timely acknowledgement, response and status reporting. Instead of seeing gremlins around every corner, could it be that this is supposed to ensure that a provider uses an acceptable electronic format and will be responsible for reporting your payment in a timely manner and must let you know that they have received it, etc?
Most of that electronic legislation is to try to protect the consumer. The language is awful and confusing and this bill needs a communication overhaul but the government is NOT taking over anyone's world. Really, this is bordering on mass paranoia without merit.
On Sotomayor's appointment..
ReplyDeleteWhy anyone would cheer the appointment of this racist is beyond me. It really is sickening what this country has become This is asinine, ridiculous, and absurd [beyond that, it's political extortion]! You have to consider this situation in totality with Democrats' ars-kissing of Hispanics with this Sotomayor appointment; their futuristic efforts toward passing immigration reform [and a motor-voter style fast tract of illegals to legal status]; their use to date of corrupt organizations such as Acorn to stuff ballot boxes; all toward the purpose of facilitating Democratic Party voter registration and the elections of Democrats. Additionally, Attorney-General Holder call all of us A NATION OF COWARDS concerning his interpretation of racial inequality. Americans elected Obama as the nation's first black president partially due to their misplaced historical guilt over the slavery issue, and Obama and liberals are taking full advantage of America's stupidity by expeditiously as possible placing POWER RE-DISTRIBUTION mechanisms in our culture in order to maintain their power base. Since monitary reparation for slavery isn't possible[to date], Democrats' political power grabs are the next best thing. It amazing that Democrats screamed bloody-murder about the fictitious voting irregularities against Republicans in 2000 in the state of Florida [and filed numerous lawsuits and legal actions thereafter to redress their being wronged]; but now are totally silent and unaware [after all the MSM hasn't reported about these Black Panther voting intimidation's and back-paged Sotomayor's opinions concerning the voting of felons]of these happenings!!!!!
Once again, our "hope and change" president proves that he provides neither. He has nominated a judge and she as been confirmed but rules on the basis of gender and ethnicity, rather than on the basis of the law and the Constitution. Obama had to go to his checklist and make sure that a Latina was nominated. I'm sure she's a decent enough judge, but wouldn't it have been better if the president had chosen someone based on merit and on their likelihood to uphold the Constitution? It doesn't matter to me whether the nominee is black, male, female, Catholic, Jewish, Hindu, or Latino. I guess I was just hoping for some change. I thought racism was being overcome in this country. I guess not
I would rather have a colonscopy than attend a fundraiser with
ReplyDeleteNancy Pelosi
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that when Øbama incited this rioting & assault on our liberties (we were all attacked in St. Louis-whether we were there or not) he can & should be held criminally accountable. This turd is starting to show what sort of a thug he really is. I thought the Cambridge incident was bad but this assault along with the .Gov web site trap as well as the snitch on your neighbor plan show an all too familiar pattern akin to neighboring Banana Republic Tyrants with whom he is sympatico .
ReplyDeleteWhere the hell is that birth certificate anyway?
Ciao: Pelosi isn’t my favorite person, however, I didn’t see/hear what you are referring to, so I can’t comment because I don’t have the facts. I can say this though; no one should refer to another as a “Nazi.” And even though I don’t like Nancy Pelosi, I think it’s appalling when people call her “Nazi Pelosi.”
ReplyDeleteOcto: I’m sorry you feel an opinion needs to be based on facts. Last time I checked an opinion was based on a feeling and didn’t need anything factual to back it up. I still stand by my “assertions” that if passed this bill will be disastrous.
I am astonished over the Town Hall meetings, too. However, I didn’t attend any of them. I didn’t write any of the “scripts” the media is talking about. I wrote my blog post before I even knew about those meetings. That doesn’t diminish the fact that if people are being threatened or hurt, it’s wrong. Nothing has ever been accomplished with screaming, yelling or thug-like actions. It’s inexcusable.
You said that my “assertion” of illegals being included in the bill is “false.” The Heller Amendment, which would’ve removed illegals from the bill was defeated 26-15. Illegals aren’t disqualified from the bill, that is why is said to “read the bill,” so my statement is not false. The bill also states that non-resident aliens are exempt from paying taxes, see page 50 Section 152. While most of us aren’t exempt from paying taxes (those who are in dire straits can get some assistance.) I am a bit upset over those 2 items, because I see them as unfair to us legal Americans who work hard and pay taxes, hence my statement. If you see that as a “rabble-rousing” then that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
Rocky: Yes, you are right. This statement: (F) provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary could be referring to the provider; it quite possibly and most probably is there to quicken up the payment process between the insurance co and health care provider and it’s most likely trying to protect the consumer. However, it’s not paranoia when the bill can be translated in a couple different ways. THAT isn’t our fault. It’s the fault of the writers. These bills are ridiculous and should be written so that there is no misinterpretation.
Duke: Thanks for stopping by. And while I appreciate your passionate feelings toward the nomination of Sotomayer, this isn’t the appropriate forum. This topic is about Health Care. In the future I would really appreciate it if you would stay on topic, because I try to reply to all my readers and when one gets off topic it gets too confusing. Thank you.
Conservative: Hopefully with this Health Care plan, if you need a colonoscopy it will be a covered procedure.
Tenzin: I don’t agree with the “snitching on your neighbor” at all. This is America and we have the right to disagree with our government. However, I don’t think yelling and screaming at Town Hall meetings is productive nor do I think it reflects well on us as Americans or Conservatives. The Health Care debate has become a battlefield, which is disturbing. Everyone needs to take a deep breath and look at this with clearer heads. Trust me, I don’t like the bill, however, I’m not fighting with anyone over it. I’m not screaming at anyone either. I am blogging and I will continue to do so. Hopefully our representatives will read the bill over their break and come back and answer the questions we have. Until then, let us read the bill and get as informed as we can. Let’s use one another to bounce ideas off of and what we don’t understand, let’s ask one another for help. Being informed is the best defense we can have.
Pamela: "Octo: I’m sorry you feel an opinion needs to be based on facts. Last time I checked an opinion was based on a feeling and didn’t need anything factual to back it up."
ReplyDeleteThen, according to your world view, the earth is flat and only 6,000 years old, dinosaurs coexisted at the same time as human beings, Galileo was wrong and deserved to be persecuted, and 1 + 1 = anything you want it to be.
I am absolutely astonished!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOcto: I feel (hopefully I’m using the correct term) your analogy with Galileo is a bit over the top, but I’m sure you did that on purpose to drive your point home. Point made. Would the term “sentiment” have been better than “opinion?” If so, I can write a post retracting my opinion and redirect it to say sentiment. The last thing I want to do is entice anger, fear or hatred because I used the inappropriate term when expressing my feelings.
ReplyDeleteIn all honesty, most of us include some of our “personal feelings” when posting; along with facts, which I DID with my post. I do research, no one can dispute that. You may not agree with my “personal feelings” but that doesn’t make them wrong, it just means YOU don’t like them. Again, if you believe my personal feelings are “rabble-rousing” then in the future I will be crystal clear that they are in fact MY FEELINGS and not an opinion. Hopefully that will lead to less misinterpretation.
Lynne: You give respectful commentary over at Shaw’s Place, as do I. But when you come here you give one or two liners that don’t contribute to the dialogue. I welcome ALL views here on my blog and would appreciate if you would contribute to the topic at hand. If I am CONSTANTLY complaining, please elaborate.
Pamela,
ReplyDeleteI love your blog and your opinions! I think you are a saint for responding so civilly and calmly to some of these comments.
For example, if someone had accused me of having "a serious reading comprehension problem...deliberately misreading texts for the purpose of scare mongering, rabble-rousing, and deception" and called MY words "a string of empty assertions without evidence or proof", I would not have been able to resist pointing it out that the same person in this very thread supported his assumptions with statistics such as "25 years ago, the percentage of bankruptcies attributed to catastrophic healthcare expense was 8%. Today, the percentage is 60%." That stat is meaningless - there could have been 100 bankruptcies 25 years ago, with 8 due to health expenses. If today there are only 10 bankruptcies only 6 would be due to health expenses. The only meaningful statistic would be what is happening to the percent of total American households that have declared bankruptcy due to catastrophic healthcare expenses. Any random statistic does not a factual argument make.
And then throwing around the over-used, famously inflated "50+ million people who have no health coverage, and those who are under-insured". The number of legitimately uninsured (those who want insurance but can't get it and are legal citizens of this country) is not 50 million. Some estimates are as low as 10 million. But it's nice to pick the number that fits your argument, no, and call it "proof" of its validity? HA!
And by the way, my forbears also came to this county to escape tyrannical governments who over-controlled and over-taxed good, hard-working citizens, and absolutely forbade dissent by criminalizing and demonizing it. Sound familar?
Sandy: Thank you. I really do try to be tolerant and respectful to everyone. I know what you are saying about “statistics,” and trust me, it’s not always easy to keep my fingers idle, but I decided when I started blogging that I would pick and chose my battles. One of my favorite mottos is: Sometimes the best response is no response.
ReplyDeleteSome salient facts about health care costs:
ReplyDeleteFY 2008 - $2.8 trillion representing 17% of gross domestic product (compare with Switzerland = 10.9 % GDP, Germany = 9.7% GDP, Canada = 9.7% GDP, France = 9.5% GDP)
Projections: $3.1 trillion by 2012 and $4.3 trillion by 2016; 20% GDP by 2017.
Since 1999, employment-based health insurance premiums have increased 120 percent, compared to cumulative inflation of 44 percent and cumulative wage growth of 29 percent during the same period.
Medical Bills Underlie 60% of US Bankruptcies:
“Medical bills are involved in more than 60 percent of U.S. personal bankruptcies, an increase of 50 percent in just six years, U.S. researchers reported Thursday (…) More than 75 percent of these bankrupt families had health insurance but still were overwhelmed by their medical debts, the team at Harvard Law School, Harvard Medical School and Ohio University reported in the American Journal of Medicine.”
Pamela...
ReplyDeleteSome of the conversations and accusations going on here bother me and I think what it all boils down to is the fact that the 1000+ page bill is confusing. We are not all lawyers or health care experts. The terminology used is just asking for trouble. Like I mentioned in my post, when representatives question the point in reading it, something is so obviously wrong. We can only speculate at the intentions regarding this bill, like why it is being forced down our throats so quickly or why it is so long and worded so "technical."
When we read it, we interpret the only way we can. From what we've learned and experienced. I'm sure my interpretation will probably be completely different then some lawyer. Fancy words are NOT better, just more confusing!! I thought this quote was interesting. Lincoln knew what he was doing with this speech, maybe the writers of this bill should take some notes!
"Consider this: over 75 percent of the words in Lincoln’s masterful “Gettysburg Address” (claimed by many to be the greatest speech ever written in the English language) are only five or fewer letters long."
Shaw Kenawe said...
ReplyDelete"I have a few problems with this technology though. But first, I want to hear all the Liberals screaming about the violation of our Constitutional Rights. You know, invasion of privacy, like they did when Bush wired taped Terrorist’s telephone calls. Because with THIS system every time you sneeze it’s going to be recorded. Not to mention you will be giving them your checking and savings account information in REAL TIME. If THAT’S not invasion of privacy, I don’t know what is."
Doesn't the Government (the IRS) already know how much money we have? We are mandated to give them that information each April 15.
__________________________________
Since you are too much of a coward to debate me at your site, this statement shows exactly how much of a statist you truly are.
If you rely on the government to tell us how much money was paid in, then God, or bhuddah or whatever you worship help you.
The only statement I agree with in this whole mess, is when President Obama (and others) say that unless we change the way we provide health care, our economy is going to get worse.
ReplyDeleteIt is imperative that we change what we are doing, now.
If it is going to be tax dollars, then we have to face decisions on abortion, right to life, living wills, etc...
There is nothing new about people being upset about how their tax money is used.
Whatever we decide, it won't be the end of the U.S.,even if we do nothing.
Doing nothing only shows the lack of courage we have as Americans, to solve our problems.
Since you are too much of a coward to debate me at your site, this statement shows exactly how much of a statist you truly are.--bluepitbull
ReplyDeletePamela,
This is the second time in less than a month that the above-commenter has called me names when I have NOT engaged him in any sort of discussion on his blog or on anyone else's. Over at TRUTH 101's blog, he called me a "harpie" when I was NOT involved in any discussion with him. I had simply left a comment at TRUTH's concerning a subject he blogged on.
I have asked this commenter NOT to come to my blog, where he is not welcomed.
This commenter seems not to be able to understand that I do not want any interaction with him whatsoever.
There is nothing more for me to say in this matter.
Thanks for the otherwise great discussion here.
My objections to this bill, and all the other versions now being debated, are raised on the first page of the document.
ReplyDeleteWhat right does the Government have to decide for me what, if any, health care coverage I should have?
I thought I had the right to decide what I want to do with my life and my property.
This is not my idea of Liberty and freedom. It may be smart to be insured, but don't I have the right to decide whether i want to be smart or not? Don't I have a right to be stupid?
It seems the Democrats (and Obama) exercise that right every day.
Mark: I respect your standing up for your rights and freedom to not have health insurance. But I also know that if you break your leg you're going to the emergency room and if you don't pay, the rest of us will with higher premiums and taxes.
ReplyDeletePaying for services received is a responsibility. Perhaps Obama should have a year without medicaid and public aid. The poor and uninsured show up at the clinic with no means to pay, give them a flag and say God Bless America. But no medicine for you today.
Blue: You KNOW I like you a lot and consider you a friend and very good blogger. However, I also consider Shaw a friend and a very good blogger, too, EVEN though she and I are from different sides of the political aisle. With that being said, I need to ask a favor of you.
ReplyDeleteI know you and she don’t get along. And that’s fine. I’m not saying you two have to like one another. However, I’m in the middle, because I like BOTH of you. So, as a favor to ME, would you just not respond to her comments and she won’t respond to yours.
Thank you.
What spin the Libs put on the Sarah Palin story and on Obama's healthcare plan or bill or whatever the heck he wants to call it. I call it a line of bull, and a sack of lies..
ReplyDeleteHow anyone can imagine that the government will NOT use the provisions of this bill to ration care with a panel determining "return on investment" is beyond me.
More than half of the costs of medical care arise from medical problems of the elderly. Clearly that is the only area where any significant "savings" can be found.
The plan is simple: Old people, no longer working and usually paying little or no taxes, are a drain on government and a direct threat Obama's grand marxist utopia. Withdraw care for those who will not likely live long to "amortize" the cost and divert it to those with more voting years left as dependents of the state. So lets let them just wander off into the pasture. What a sick idiot he is. I wonder if he would say that to his Typical White Grandmother!
We cheat the other guy and pass the savings on to you" is the real message of the socialists.
Sarah Palin is just saying what most thinking people immediately understand when reading HR 3200 in the light of past experience of government power grabs.
And now Nancy Pighostly is saying that it's UN American to protest it.
I thought that it was our American right to protest whatever we didn't agree with.
Or is that only true for the democrats?
Nope. Can't do that Pam. She is a liar just as much as time was.
ReplyDeleteShe started something with me that she can't finish so no.
I can, however, not comment here out of respect for you..
I'm sorry Julie. I didn't see where the plan included the word "marxist." Could you give me a page number you found that on. And if you could also tell me what page the provision for withdrawing treatment for old people is?
ReplyDeleteI've seen many links to the provision covering living wills which everyone should have.
That leaves the decision to the patient while he/she is mentally capable of making it. After that it's up to the family. Damn selfish of those without a living will to leave that decision to somebody else Julie.
The libs find a way to spin, or lie or do whatever it takes to grind us down.
ReplyDeleteWe must not let them get away with it.
As for what (Truth101) posted.
Is that the only fault you can find in what Julie wrote about Obama's plan?
Then you must admit the rest of what she said is true. As I do.
Truth101 you have spun the facts AGAIN.. No one is talking about a "living Will"
ReplyDeleteDidn't you read where Obama suggested at a town hall event recently that one way to cut down on medical costs is to stop expensive and ultimately futile procedures performed on people who are about to die and don't stand to gain from the extra care.
What the hell does that mean!
You know damn well what it means.
So stop the BS.
If you want to play spin the bottle you have the wrong guy to play it with.
My Files wrote, "stop expensive and ultimately futile procedures performed on people who are about to die and don't stand to gain from the extra care.
ReplyDeleteWhat the hell does that mean!"
As a medical professional, I can tell you exactly what that means.
It means not breaking all the ribs in grandma's chest trying to restart a heart that is too old and too sick to continue to beat. It means not blowing up her lungs by mechanical means just to keep a body seemingly alive long after the lights have gone out. It means providing compassionate care in the form of pain relief and comfort to those who are about to leave this world - because, at the end of the day, none of us are getting out alive and to continue to perform painful and expensive procedures on a dying person just to wring a few more bucks out of their pitiful, broken bodies is disrespectful of life and the mandates of ethical medicine.
I don't have the actual quote right in front of me, but I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find...
ReplyDeleteSo, I'll quote as accurately as I can what Obama hisself said regarding end of life care:
"Maybe she (Someone's grandmother) should not have the surgery and just take painkillers."
He said that when asked if passion for life should be a determining factor on whether an elderly woman should get lifesaving surgeries and treatment, instead of allowing them to die.
Now, maybe the term "euthanasia" isn't in the actual draft of any of the versions of the bill, but Obama made his wishes very clear.
"Maybe she should not have the surgery and just take painkillers".
Run that by your own grandmother and see if she agrees.
Truth101, you said, "But I also know that if you break your leg you're going to the emergency room and if you don't pay, the rest of us will with higher premiums and taxes"
ReplyDeleteWrong. Hospitals are still privately run companies for now. The Hospital absorbs the costs for unpaid bills. Not the government. Not the taxpayers.
Now, if Obamacare gets signed into federal law, taxpayers will absorb the costs, and also the shortages, inefficiencies etc.
And all without asking us if we want to make that choice!
By the way, calling it a public option is an oxymoron, too. We already have a public option in this country. It's called Health Insurance. We have tho option of buying it or not and buying it from the provider of our choice. Obama wants to eliminate that choice.
And that's the point. That's why Obama's health care plan, (or so-called public option) is unconstitutional.
Mark: a large number of hospitals are non profit and have to treat anybody that walks in the door. Our taxes, higher premiums and higher health care costs pay for these people. You still have time to delete that inane statement you just posted and try again.
ReplyDeleteTo the His Files: your post was disingenuous at best. You obviously only allow your mind to comprehend that which fits your own opinion.
Sandy made false inferences about the health care bill. (Which I oppose by the way.) If you can show me where it uses the word "marxist" and withdraws treatment from someone because he's old, I'll apologise to you. A living will is a responsible way to see that your wishes are carried out in the event of impennding death. It's a responsible way to handle painful decisions that would be unfairly left to your loved ones.
And no offense to you Buddy, but you "spin the bottle" thing doesn't intimidate me or anyone else. Now before you post some other comment that you can pump up your chest over, I suggest you fill out a living will friend.
You are 2/3 right. Higher premiums and higher health care costs pay for these people. But not taxes.
ReplyDeleteIf Taxes paid for them, why do hospitals sue patients that don't pay?
rockync said...
ReplyDeleteMy Files wrote, "stop expensive and ultimately futile procedures performed on people who are about to die and don't stand to gain from the extra care.
What the hell does that mean!"
"What the hell does that mean!"
As Your Friend SHAW would say, "I think you have a serious reading comprehension problem."
It’s all very simple:
ReplyDeleteI don’t TRUST Obama.
I don’t trust a person who makes mistakes, misleads the public, believes the wrong things, is totally selfish, xenophobic attitude. His supporters might as well return to the rule of Cuba or Venezuela. You don’t want him as President.
You want a Dictator..
Have you ever been to a communist country? They are lifting the travel ban on going to Cuba. I suggest you make a trip down there and see how well that "shared wealth" policy has worked out for the average Cuban. See how their socialized health care is doing. See how they live to a ripe old age of 42.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with societies like that is that it destroys incentive. Why would anyone put in extra effort to better his or her life if the extra fruits of their labor are going to be shared with someone who just wants to coast along.
I work my ass off and I donate money to charity and I don't mind doing it. However, I do not want government coming to me and forcing me to "share" with the guy next door who sat home all day and played video games, or is waiting for his pusher to come by.
There are a lot of things about my GOVERNMENT that I do not like. There are a lot of things that need to get fixed. There is nothing wrong with America that can not be fixed by what is right with America. I think that's the thing the loony folks on the left just don't get.
The White House, Washington
ReplyDeleteDear Friend,
Anyone that's watched the news in the past few days knows that health insurance reform is a hot topic — and that rumors and scare tactics have only increased as more people engage with the issue. Given a lot of the outrageous claims floating around, it’s time to make sure everyone knows the facts about the security and stability you get with health insurance reform.
That’s why we’ve launched a new online resource — WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck — to help you separate fact from fiction and share the truth about health insurance reform. Here's a few of the reality check videos you can find on the site:
* CEA Chair Christina Romer details how health insurance reform will impact small businesses.
* Domestic Policy Council Director Melody Barnes tackles a nasty rumor about euthanasia and clearly describes how reform helps families.
* Matt Flavin, the White House's Director of Veterans and Wounded Warrior Policy, clears the air about Veteran's benefits.
* Kavita Patel, M.D., a doctor serving in the White House's Office of Public Engagement, explains that health care rationing is happening right now and how reform gives control back to patients and doctors.
* Bob Kocher, M.D., a doctor serving on the National Economic Council, debunks the myth that health insurance reform will be financed by cutting Medicare benefits.
There's more information and a number of online tools you can use to spread the truth among your family, friends and other social networks. Take a look:
Health Insurance Reform Reality Check
We knew going into this effort that accomplishing comprehensive health insurance reform wasn't going to be easy. Achieving real change never is. The entrenched interests that benefit from the status quo always use their influence in Washington to try and keep things just as they are.
But don't be misled. We know the status quo is unsustainable. If we do nothing, millions more Americans will be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions, or see their coverage suddenly dropped if they become seriously ill. Out-of-pocket expenses will continue to soar, and more and more families and businesses will be forced to deal with health insurance costs they can’t afford.
That's the reality.
Americans deserve better. You deserve a health care system that works as well for you as it does for the status quo; one you can depend on — that won't deny you coverage when you need it most or charge you crippling out-of-pocket co-pays. Health insurance reform means guaranteeing the health care security and stability you deserve.
President Barack Obama promised he'd bring change to Washington and fix our broken, unsustainable health insurance system. You can help deliver that change. Visit WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck, get the facts and spread the truth. The stakes are just too high to do nothing.
Thank you,
David
David Axelrod
Senior Advisor to the President
Visit Whitehouse.gov
The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111
I read your comment three times looking for where in the massive and ridiculous lobbyist pandering health care bill you found the word "marxist" Sandy. You must plan on putting that in your next comment.
ReplyDeleteWhat Ms. Right is Right said s very revealing about the righties I poke fun at. She admits she doesn't like Obama and that is the basis for her hatred and mistrust. She's a talented blogger. Too bad she is blinded by contempt and a failed ideology.
Hey Pam and everyone - That last comment that appears to be from me was not left by me. Yeah, that's my name and my picture but I did not write that comment. The one left Aug. 10 at 6:57 p.m. jumping all over Truth101 about something about which I have no idea! Please delete it Pam b/c obviously there is some computer problem or hacking going on.
ReplyDeleteA little more info - someone has set up a new blogger profile TODAY with my name and my picture - and they left that comment. My real profile is still out there but I have no idea who has stolen my online identity!
ReplyDeleteTruth, I happen to agree with what Ms. Right said and I'll tell you why... let me count the ways....Why do I dislike Obama?
ReplyDeleteWhere does one start at the beginning I guess.
His mother Hated America his Grandparents who helped her raise him were communist Hmmm.
All of his so called mentors and friends are Terrorist.communist American hating. Birds of a feather.
He has a socialist agenda he is tearing down America with the out of control spending. Taking over businesses
His affiliation with the corrupt ACORN group.
His inexperience the fact that he wasn't even qualified to be a senator let a lone a President.
His lies,transparent white house my ass.
Where is his certificate of live birth? Why has he spent over 2 million dollars to keep it buried.
Stood on foreign soil and had the audacity to criticize the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Bowed to a Saudi King? Didn't bow to the Queen of England
The list is endless And the American people need to wake up and shake up Washington.
I do not like him because he was not raised in America, he thinks more like a foreigner and has no experience. In addition to avoiding any tough questions, he has no answers but only guesses derived from a very limited upbringing. I want a prez who is an American citizen before he is a citizen of the world. This commie bastard needs to run for czar or a socialist country and leave America to us who believe in capitalism. Spread our work ethic, not our wealth.....I worked hard while others were lazy.....they do not deserve what I sacrificed for. If you want what I have, you libs should put down the picket signs and pick up a job application.
All of BO's friends are criminal thugs and terrorist.
With that said, I do despise and distrust Obama.
I too had hoped early on he would be as he presented himself. However, as I performed my patriotic duty of due diligence in investigating candidates I was dismayed to realize Obama is a liar. His past actions showed him for the liar he is and I knew I could not trust a word out of his mouth. At least McCain did not pretend to be something he was not. McCain is a politician, and never said otherwise.
The man is a fraud. He is completely changing America for the worst. He wants to be in complete control. I love my freedom. I work hard. I pay my bills. I take care of my family. I do not need or want Obama's help. I want him serving the American people, not pursuing his own Power agenda. I want him out of my business. Period. Any questions? Or have I answered your question!
hook the anti obama czar said,
ReplyDelete"I love my freedom."
Well don't we all.
It sounds as though you feel your freedom is under attack. If you believe this I'd like to ask you some questions so we can determine how serious the situation is under Mr. Obama:
Could you please list specifically which of your Bill of Rights freedoms you no longer enjoy as a result of Mr. Obama taking them away.
I would like to see evidence--links to where the government has come into your life and abrogated your freedom of speech, your freedom to practice your religion, your freedom to own guns, your freedom to assemble, to redress grievances, to enjoy free association, your right to a free trial, your right to enjoy a free press--just for starters.
If you can produce hard evidence where you have had agents of the government come into your home and arrest you for practicing your basic freedoms, we need to know this and as soon as possible.
Otherwise, your lament that Mr. Obama is somehow ruining your country seems a bit over the top.
Mr. Obama is a politician, just like Mr. McCain.
That you and other conservatives see him as some sort of agent who wants to grab your freedoms and turn this country into a socialist marxist entity is really regrettable and, sad to say, a bit hysterical.
Mr. Obama is an American citizen who loves his country as much as you do.
You've interpreted his political philosophy and ideas to be evil and dangerous, when in fact, they are just different from what you believe.
Different doesn't mean evil.
I think you and others need to calm down and understand that we are all Americans who love our country, but who have differences of opinions in how we can improve it.
Elections have consequences. In this last presidential election, a majority of Americans voted for Mr. Obama and the Democrats. As painful as that is for you to deal with day to day, it is how our democracy works.
PDH: I don't want Government involved, but we do need some guidlines. Maybe like our roadways, we have speed limits and if you break them you get fined and points, too many tickets and you lose your license. Insurance companys could lose their license and have to reapply.
ReplyDeletePS I think our GOV'T is speeding.
I admit it. I've been lurking.
ReplyDeleteOh...where to begin??
Hamster~ There's a thing that our country seems to've forgotten. It's called personal responsiblity. The example you cite demonstrates abdication of such, except the car wreck - but did the husband have a driver's license. That's really the issue, isn't it? (For those of you taking yourselves too seriously, that was a joke. This thread has gotten far too serious.)
For those who suggest congressional TERM LIMITS, I fully agree.
For those who want yet another story (similar to Jennifer's - sorry you're having such troubles, Jen), please see:
http://getbigideas.blogspot.com/2009/07/duck-challenge-abortion.html
Truth says, "And I can safely predict, you will ask what will the government do about [lack of health insurance]."
Sir, I respectfully ask you to get over yourself. If you read the link above, you'll see we lived this & NOT ONCE did we even CONSIDER asking what the GOVERNMENT was going to do about our problems...Not everyone's fighting the crowd to get @ the Government teat!
TAO~ You bet your a#$ I'm worried about 'preying eyes'. Nationalizing medical records is an absolute invasion of my privacy. If I have some horrible skin infection or a dreadful feminine problem, it's NOBODY's business but my MD & the one who's paying for procedures; least of all the Fed. Gov't - so that years from now they can cut me off from treatment due to 'longterm need of care' or some such invention to cut costs.
Octo~ I'll bet your postings didn't include the assembly that my children & I went to - quite spontaneously, w/ no coaching, no $ exchanging hands, no talking points memos whatsoever. In fact, we were out buying football cleats & saw it going on. We went, b/c I want my children to know that THIS IS WHAT WE DO IN AMERICA!! If we don't agree, we dissent!! We discuss! We assemble!! Our Constitution affords us these rights. THEN to be told - & my children to hear it on TV - that we're an angry "rabble-rousing" MOB!!! What the HECK??? For those of you who think America will not disappear if we don't do something...You're sorely naive...
Pam~ You know I love your blog! But you've been 'astonished' at the Town Halls? Girl, you've been watching too much MSNBC or CNN...It's people like me, by & large, who're attending these things. Sure, some have gotten heated, but PEOPLE ARE ANGRY about this. Especially b/c it's being pushed SO QUICKLY!!
Sandy~ You're the sharpest statistician & numbers wizard I know! Go Get 'Em!
For the record: Whoever hijacked Sandy's picture & used her image/identity to make comments should be reported to Blogger.com (or some entity more 'official') & have their access cut off, or some more extensive pursuit. This behavior qualifies as Identity Theft & borders precariously on intimidation & Cyber Bullying. Being bested in Pam's comment section is no excuse or license for such.