national healthcare

All posts tagged national healthcare

There Must Be A 28th Amendment

Posted by Scott D Welch on January 12, 2011
Posted in: Government, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

While Main Street USA struggles to make ends meet, our elected representatives continue with their lifestyle, complete with full staff and expense accounts. 

Curious that I have never heard of layoffs happening on Capitol Hill. Perhaps there have been during this economic downturn, and, if so, this American missed the notices.

But, more to the point, our leaders create rules and regulations that apply to everyone but themselves. The most blatant was when they voted to exempt themselves from last year’s healthcare reform bill.

If it is such a great piece of legislation, why are they not taking part with the rest of us?

Another why-on-Earth-do-they-get-this-perk is that staffers of Congress members and family are exempt from having to pay back student loans. That, quite frankly, is unjust and criminal.

More annoying, perhaps, is that those sitting in Washington DC can mandate a retirement age for all, except, of course, themselves.

To ensure that all citizens are on equal footing, there should be a 28th Amendment.

It should read (not my wording, it was received in an email forward):

Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States.

Unfortunately, as Congress would have to pass this, it more than likely will never come about.

Perhaps it could be an initiative voted on by the people to become law.

One can hope.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

"Culture Crisis" NOT "Health Care Crisis"

Posted by Scott D Welch on September 17, 2010
Posted in: Culture, Government. Tagged: , , , , , . Leave a Comment

The below is posted on Facebook.

It provides an interesting point of view from an emergency room doctor treating someone on Medicaid.

 Dr. Roger Starner Jones

Dr. Jones recently wrote a short, two-paragraph letter to the White House where he accurately puts the blame on a “Culture Crisis” instead of a “Health Care Crisis” . . .

It’s worth a quick read.

“Dear Mr. President:

“During my shift in the Emergency Room last night, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient whose smile revealed an expensive shiny gold tooth, whose body was adorned with a wide assortment of elaborate and costly tattoos, who wore a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and who chatted on a new cellular telephone equipped with a popular R&B ringtone.

“While glancing over her patient chart, I happened to notice that her payer status was listed as “Medicaid”! During my examination of her, the patient informed me that she smokes more than one pack of cigarettes every day, eats only at fast-food take-outs, and somehow still has money to buy pretzels and beer. And, you and our Congress expect me to pay for this woman’s health care? I contend that our nation’s “health care crisis” is not the result of a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. Rather, it is the result of a “crisis of culture” a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on luxuries and vices while refusing to take care of one’s self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance. It is a culture based in the irresponsible credo that “I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me”. Once you fix this “culture crisis” that rewards irresponsibility and dependency, you’ll be amazed at how quickly our nation’s health care difficulties will disappear.

“Respectfully,
ROGER STARNER JONES, MD

“If you agree…pass it on.”
 
Very well and accurately stated by Dr. Jones.
 
Food for thought.
 
Over For Now.
 
Main Street One

How Polls Can Be Skewed

Posted by Scott D Welch on March 24, 2010
Posted in: Business, Economy, PhRMA. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

A recent poll released just prior to the House of Representatives’ vote on Main Street USA’s Health Care Right bill shows what can be accomplished when enough rhetoric is thrown at a topic.

According to HealthDay News, “Nearly half of Americans are ‘extremely’ or ‘very worried’ about rising costs for health care and health insurance, and a majority place the blame on drug and insurance company profits, a new Harris Interactive/HealthDay poll finds.”

There were many on Capitol Hill who had assailed the insurance companies and their profits, in particular, for rising healthcare costs, making them, in essence, the “bad guy.”
 
The article in HealthDay News continued by saying, “Some health economists say insurance and pharmaceutical company (PhRMA) profits amount to only about 2 percent of total health care spending.
 
“Instead, fees charged by doctors and hospitals, as well as expanding use of increasingly sophisticated and expensive health-care technologies, are the primary cause of escalating health-care costs, these experts contend.”
 
The article, interestingly enough, does not elaborate on the fact that 44% of those surveyed felt that higher costs were due to “more tests, treatments and procedures ordered by doctors due to malpractice worries.”
 
Aside from the possibility of more tests, there is clear and present evidence that escalating malpractice insurance premiums are caused by astronomical punitive damages awarded.
 
Tort Reform should definitely play a major role in health care reform.
 
Nowhere in the poll does it mention fraud or corruption within the medical industry as contributing to higher costs, yet it does exist.
 
More than likely many Americans know that medical offices have two sets of charges. A lower price if someone is paying their own way and a higher price if the care is billed to an insurance company. This is, in reality, fradulant.
 
The reasons given often have to do with payments not being made in a timely manner or even that payments for those services do not ever arrive.
 
Regardless of the reason for the disparity, that is just another of the many causes for the higher costs of medical care.
 
In this fairly balanced article, there is the point made by Humphrey Taylor, chairman of The Harris Poll, a service of Harris Interactive. He said, ”These findings show how little most people understand the economics of health care. Increased profits of insurers and drug companies (if they have increased at all) cannot possibly account for the increases in premiums. Many health-care economists attribute the increased cost of care to increased demand and utilization, increased prices and the increased use of expensive tests and treatments. Most people, as shown here, do not think of these as the main drivers of increased health-care spending.”
 
The poll results do show that if enough high-profile people speak out against something often enough that polls can, indeed, be skewed by incorrect information disseminated.
 
Over For Now.
 
Main Street One

The Concept of Rights

Posted by Scott D Welch on March 23, 2010
Posted in: Economy, Government, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . 1 comment

In this case, the concept of the Rights of Main Street USA.

Following is the lead paragraph in an Associated Press article published after the ONE TRILLION DOLLAR* health care reform was signed:

“Claiming a historic triumph that could define his presidency, a jubilant Barack Obama signed a massive, nearly $1 trillion health care overhaul on Tuesday that will for the first time cement insurance coverage as the right of every U.S. citizen and begin to reshape the way virtually all Americans receive and pay for treatment.”

Let us take a close look at a critical portion of this paragraph.

“…cement insurance coverage as the right of every U.S. citizen…”

According to the dictionary, right, as used here, is defined as: “a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral.”

The interesting fact about the so-called Health Care Right is that if one does not exercise said right the IRS will come calling to collect a fine for not passing go (i.e., obtaining insurance coverage whether you desire to have it or not, such as the ten million Americans right now who can afford it but have elected not to purchase it).

So, yes, that does reshape how we will pay for treatment, as mentioned in the paragraph above.

The question all Americans should be asking is: How is that a “right?”

According to the Bill of Rights, Americans have the right to/of:

-Freedom of speech. Our Founding Fathers, however, did not see fit to fine anyone if they did not exercise their right to talk.

-Freedom of Religion. Have never read about a person being fined for not exercising their right of practicing a religion.

-To petition. When was the last time someone was fined for not submitting a petition?

-To keep and bear arms. We know darn well that no one is fining us for not having firearms in our possession. Fact is, there are those seeking to destroy this particular right.

You get the idea, I am sure.

Politicians cannot have it both ways.

They cannot, sanely and logically, promote to the populace that something is a right if a person will be fined for not exercising that right.

That is an interesting encroachment upon the rights of Main Street USA.

A reversal of the norm.

What comes next?

As it is every citizen’s right to vote, will there be legislation (or better yet, a simple earmark to a larger bill) allowing the IRS to fine people who do not exercise their right to vote.

What a concept.

Great fundraiser for the IRS.

Actually it is a double-barrelled fine…you would also pay for not registering to vote.

Food For Thought.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

* to spend One Trillion Dollars you need to buy a million dollar house each and very day for One Million Days (or slightly over 2,700 years).

Though Promised, There Is NO Transparency

Posted by Scott D Welch on March 22, 2010
Posted in: Economy, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

While campaigning for the Oval Office, President Obama made this promise to all of Main Street USA:

“When there is a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what’s in it before I sign it, so that you know what your government’s doing.”

Any bets on whether or not the massive pork and earmark-filled healthcare reform bill will even make it to the WH website, let alone be on it for five full days prior to his signature?

Within the first two months of his presidency, of 11 major bills that the president signed, only six of them (55%) made it online for review prior to his signing them and none of them (0%) were posted a full five days.

And it has not gotten any better.

With the number of votes that had to be purchased to push this legislation through the House it is this taxpayer’s opinion that most of us will not see the full bill for quite some time, if ever.

As has been stated, the Congressional Special Interest Group (the buying of Senate and House votes through legislation earmarks especially for them) is much more dangerous than any single SIG in existence.

This bill proves it.

The government will now be responsible for over 50% of our gross domestic product.

Certain civil rights, such as the right to choose if one wants healthcare coverage or not, are gone.

That all members of Main Street USA must pay for walking parks in some town in a state many have never even visited is not what this country should be doing.

Ad infinitum.

At a time when unemployment is over 10% nationwide, when state officials are unable to raise enough funds to cover bare necessities of what government should be doing, when city municipalities are not able to honor bonds issued and where our own federal government has been “borrowing” from the social security trust fund (to the tune of over three trillion dollars), our elected representatives should be focused on making effective financial cuts, not spending yet another trillion dollars we do not have.

Our Founding Fathers may have had it right placing “In God We Trust” everywhere.

Because politicians continue to prove they cannot be trusted.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

House Speaker Speaks Up, Defies Polls

Posted by Scott D Welch on March 1, 2010
Posted in: Economy, Government. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, on ABC television’s “This Week,” stated, without any doubt, that if President Obama decides to use the reconciliation method of political maneuvering she will deliver the votes without the support of any Republicans.

Make no mistake, polls also show reform is needed and wanted.

However, poll after poll bring into the open that the majority of Americans do not approve of either of the bills that passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The strong-arm tactic that will apparently be used on these earmarked pieces of legislation that will affect 17% of the U.S. economy is not representative of what Americans need or want.

Why won’t our elected representatives listen?

It has been voiced by some Democrats that objections regarding the healthcare reform bills are due to mis-information delivered by Republicans.

There probably does exist some of that.

However, Democrats are guilty of the same activity.

Consider that the bills are supposedly going to provide coverage for some 30 million Americans who do not currently have any form of healthcare insurance.

Yet, one third of that total, ten million people, have elected not to carry insurance, despite the fact that they can afford it. These people are exercising their own free will, as is their right, and making their own decisions about what they need and want.

Not if this legislation passes.

They will be forced into obtaining and paying for insurance, or be fined and/or be visited by the IRS.

This type of political activity, economic ramifications aside, erodes our Bill of Rights.

This type of political activity drastically increases the role of government in the lives of all Americans.

It used to be that when the People speak those who have been elected to follow the will of the People respond to that will.

Evidently, no longer.

As Pelosi stated on ABC TV, “We’re here to do the job for the American people — to get them results that gives them not only health security, but economic security, because the health issue is an economic issue for America’s families.”

If she truly believed those words, then the Speaker would respond to, and support, the People, Main Street USA. She would champion their cause and scrap the thousands of pages of pork-filled legislation that currently exist and start anew with something meaningful and truly helpful.

Instead of ducking their responsibility on Tort Reform by passing it off to the individual states (which, as previously discussed, would become a national matter in the U.S. Supreme Court), the House and Senate should pass legislation immediately in this area.

Taxpayers do not need to pay for frivolous lawsuits that clog the Court system and, in the end, raise insurance rates each and every time they succeed. That is a double-whammy to the pocketbook of Main Street USA.

One last note.

Most of the articles that appear regarding passage of healthcare reform state that “Obama has the votes to pass reform” the way it is currently written.

Since when did the White House become more important than the collective voice, opinion and will of Main Street USA?

Yes, President Obama, we do need healthcare reform.

But not in the current state as presented.

Eliminate Medicare and Medicaid fraud-NOW.

Stop frivolous lawsuits with Tort Reform-AT ONCE.

Then, and only then, should we move forward with legislation that is significant and does not trample on the Rights of Americans to choose what they need and want.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Frivolous Lawsuits (ie Tort Reform)

Posted by Scott D Welch on February 26, 2010
Posted in: Economy, Government. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

The more I ponder President Obama’s words at yesterday’s Health Care Summit regarding frivolous lawsuit legislation being handed over to the states, the more it makes less sense to me.

Truth be told, zero sense.

Especially if one of the driving forces behind effective national healthcare reform is to lower costs to Main Street USA.

The insurance business is one of the riskiest businesses around.

Think about it. A company takes what is, in reality, a small amount of money from each of many people and ends up paying out money to cover whatever is insured.

In the health field, that particular cost is incredibly compounded by frivolous lawsuits and tort awards that are way out of line.

In order to protect themselves, and stay in business, insurance companies charge higher premiums.

There are major flaws with trying to pawn this area off to the states.

In the first place, consider the fact that not every state may enact any legislation at all. And, because it is being left up to the states, the laws themselves will vary (probably greatly) and provide different levels of protection.

Unless, of course, it is mandated that all states enact legislation. And, if that ends up being the case, why not do it at the national level?

Possibly the biggest factor, however, is that if a plaintiff does not like the award received in their judgment, even if it was at the uppermost limit a state allowed, it would be appealed. First to the Appellate Court, the the State Supreme Court and, ultimately, to the US Supreme Court, where a decision would be made.

And that decision would affect all states.

Thus, all that would be accomplished by pushing this particular area of responsibility and legislation to the states is clogging the courts with appeals that eventually end up in our highest court in the land for a decision.

As a note, that would, of course, be after each state spent countless hours, days, weeks – i.e., taxpayer dollars – in order to craft and pass legislation. Yet, another cost for Main Street USA to carry.

Therefore, all of this means, in the end, that there would be more burdensome costs for the good ole middle class. (And this is a hidden cost, not covered in either the House or Senate healthcare reform legislation.)

Another item to consider is that many elected (and appointed) representatives on Capitol Hill totally vilify the insurance companies as greedy, making too much money off of the middle class, etc., etc.

Think about this for a minute…how much money does an attorney make who wins a frivolous lawsuit or a suit that awards monetary damages in the hundreds of millions to someone?

A bundle, to be sure.

As an example, perhaps the attorney is working on a 30 or 40 percent retainer and the award comes in at $100 million. The plaintiff gets $60 or $70 million and the attorney walks away with a cool $30 or $40 million.

The lawyer will defend this and speak of all the time and costs involved that he/she must pay out of their portion of the settlement. But how many of those attorneys have to worry about health insurance, making their mortgage payment, putting food on the table? How many of them live in million-dollar-plus homes and drive cars that the vast majority of Main Street USA can only dream about?

It is still this Main Streeter’s opinion that this issue is being relegated to the states because attorneys and law firms are some of the biggest contributors to campaigns and spend millions of dollars lobbying.

Thus, by not tackling Tort Reform at the Federal level our elected public servants are being incredibly irresponsible in this area.

America does not need bigger, expanding government. America needs fair and equitable government representing the best interests of the People.

For Healthcare Reform, that starts with Tort Reform - putting an end to frivolous lawsuits and outlandish settlements – at the Federal, not State, level. And not attempting to rid the country of insurance companies so that we end up with socialized medicine.

If that happens, what is next? Uncle Sam’s Gas Stations?

Over For Now.

Main Street One