The Cost of Health-care Reform

The Heritage Foundation begins a week-long report on how "ObamaCare" will affect each of us.  This first segment makes interesting reading, even for those who support this political initiative into the private sector.  Here's a teaser for you:

The Senate Finance Committee bill written by Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) (the Baucus bill) first drives up the cost of health insurance for all Americans and then forces everyone to buy it or face tax penalties or jail time. While the Baucus bill does cap out-of-pocket costs based on a person's income, the effect on American families is still staggering. According to the Center for Data Analysis, the Baucus bill would:

• For individuals making $34,140 (three times the Federal Poverty Level) the Baucus health care proposal could mandate up to $4,097 in annual premiums, a sum which could have been spent on over nine months of food, almost four months of housing or well over a year of utilities.
• For a family of four making $69,480 (300% above poverty) the Baucus bill mandates annual health insurance premiums of $8,338, which would be worth the equivalent of over ten months of food, four months of housing or almost two years of utilities.
• For individuals earning $45,520 (400% above poverty) Baucus mandates $5,462 for health insurance, or over a year of food, four months of rent or a year and a half of utilities.
• For families earning $92,640 (400% above poverty) Baucus mandates $11,117 in health premiums, the equivalent of over a year of food, five months of housing or two years of utilities.

And those numbers include the subsidies for health insurance in the Baucus bill. To pay for all this new health care spending, plus the massive expansion of Medicaid, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Baucus bill will collect $4 billion in fines from those who do not purchase insurance, $200 billion taxing health insurance companies with generous health plans, and $25 billion in taxes on employers. Not to mention the billions in cuts to Medicare payments to hospitals which will result in significant cost shifting to consumers.

Read the article at http://blog.heritage.org/2009/10/12/morning-bell-obamacare-invades-your-wallet/  or  http://bit.ly/nnYOU and then ask yourself, "can I afford free health care?"

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Global Climate Change

What's your take on the issue? Do you believe, as that great climatologist AlGore preaches, that we are in a man-caused time of warming that requires us to drastically curtail our economy in order to "save the planet?" Or do you perceive climate change as naturally occurring, a cyclical series of warming and cooling that has been going on since God created the earth?

Well, you might be interested in an interview with someone who has vastly more credibility than AlGore, a man with years of experience in the field of climatology. It may well be that this man is right, and that the public has been fed a 'bill of goods' for less-than-honorable purposes by politicians eager to control their lives. Read the interview with Dr. Reid Bryson, a man who holds the 30th PHD ever granted in the field of Meteorology. Read his credentials, consider what he says, and then ask yourself why Al Gore refuses to debate anyone who holds an opinion at odds with his own.

You might also, if you're a thinking person who would rather make up your own mind, consider this article at the American Thinker that calls into question the motivation of those who would lead us back into the dark ages. Oh, and be sure to read the comments.

"What Were You Thinking?"

The Role of Mothers in Society

There were three special ladies on the Glenn Beck show today.  Three mothers who are, as are many of us, concerned about the future we will leave to our children and grandchildren.  Each of them has established a blog or website where they share their opinions on the great issues that face our nation, it's citizens, and our leadership.  Each of them offers the perspective of a mother on these issues, and I commend their writings to you.  I also suggest that you consider joining the "Sisterhood of Mommy Patriots."

 

Mary Baker - http://marymbaker.blogspot.com/

Mary is a mother of seven, a Christian Conservative who says, "This blog has been created to bring a Christian Biblical and Conservative prospective about events and issues of the day."

 

Mary Conley - "As A Mom... A Sisterhood of Mommy Patriots" - http://asamom.ning.com/

 

Barbara Curtis - "Mommy Life" - http://mommylife.net/

Barbara, who is a mother of twelve, says, "..I'd judged Christians harshly all my life. But I discovered being a Christian wasn't about following Christians - it's about following Christ."

 

"What Were You Thinking?"

Busy, Busy, Busy!

"What Were You Thinking?"

Medicare and Gag Orders

A short, interesting bit in the Wall Street Journal this morning, one you likely didn't hear about if you only pay attention to what was once the "Mainstream Media." Here it is, in its entirety, for your edification. It is sad enough that our elected legislators do not read the bills they vote on; it is truly unfortunate that those who write the laws for our country don't think that we have the right to find out the truth from other sources. Do yourself a favor; read the first and last paragraphs a couple of times. The article is sub-titled "Humana gets whacked for telling the truth; AARP gets a pass for spreading falsehoods."

Maybe Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus should put a gag order on Douglas Elmendorf too. On Tuesday, the Congressional Budget Office director told Mr. Baucus's committee that its plan to cut $123 billion from Medicare Advantage - the program that gives almost one-fourth of seniors private health-insurance options - will result in lower benefits and some 2.7 million people losing this coverage.

Imagine that. Last week Mr. Baucus ordered Medicare regulators to investigate and likely punish Humana Inc. for trying to educate enrollees in its Advantage plans about precisely this fact. Jonathan Blum, acting director of a regulatory office in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), said that a mailer Humana sent its customers was "misleading and confusing to beneficiaries, who may believe that it represents official communication about the Medicare Advantage program."

Mr. Blum has also banned all Advantage contractors from telling their customers what Mr. Elmendorf has just told Congress. Mr. Blum happens to be a former senior aide to Mr. Baucus and a health adviser on the Obama transition team.

Meanwhile, we have the case of the Association for the Advancement of Retired Persons (AARP), and its fanciful Medicare claims. The self-styled seniors lobby is using all its money and influence to cheer on ObamaCare, even though polls show that most retired persons oppose it. AARP has spent millions of dollars on its TV ad campaign and bulletins and newsletters to its members, including eight million direct-mail letters over Labor Day. The AARP Web site claims that it is a "myth" that "health care reform will hurt Medicare," while it is a "fact" that "none of the health care reform proposals being considered by Congress will cut Medicare benefits or increase your out-of-pocket costs."

So why hasn't AARP also come under CMS scrutiny? Could that be because AARP, which markets its own branded Advantage plans with United HealthCare that have 1.7 million enrollees, is a reliable liberal ally? Certainly its claims are "misleading and confusing" - given that in this instance it is empirically untrue, unlike Humana's attempt at edification. Seniors might even think AARP's falsehoods represent official communication about the Medicare Advantage program. But don't expect Mr. Baucus or CMS to impose its gag rule on the AARP's pro-ObamaCare advocacy.

We don't think AARP should be muzzled in a political debate, but neither should the insurance industry - especially by an influential Senator getting favors from his crony in a supposedly impartial regulatory agency that has enormous power to harm or destroy private companies. Seniors have a right to know how they may be affected by Washington's health-care planning.

So, for the record, CBO's Mr. Elmendorf says that cuts to Medicare Advantage "could lead many plans to limit the benefits they offer, raise their premiums, or withdraw from the program."

"What Were You Thinking?"

Economic Vandalism

Probably not a lot of folks on this side of the pond read The Economist, one of Britain's premier news and business magazines. That's a shame. The current issue (September 19th-25th 2009) has an article entitled Economic Vandalism, investigating the potential cause and effects of the President's recently enacted 35% tariff on tires imported from China. The Economist calls this "A protectionist move that is bad politics, bad economics, bad diplomacy and hurts America." How about a few teasers before you click the link to read the entire article?

You can be fairly sure that when a government slips an announcement out at nine o’clock on a Friday night, it is not proud of what it is doing.

In every other way the president’s decision to slap a 35% tariff on imported Chinese tyres looks like a colossal blunder, confirming his critics’ worst fears about the president’s inability to stand up to his party’s special interests and stick to the centre ground he promised to occupy in office.

..no one can seriously imagine that any American tyre-making job will be saved; firms will simply import cheap tyres from other low-cost places like India and Brazil.

The tyre decision needs to be set into the context of a string of ominously protectionist policies which started within weeks of the inauguration with a nasty set of "Buy America" provisions for public-works contracts.

Besides these sins of commission sit the sins of omission: the president has done nothing at all to advance the three free-trade packages that are pending in Congress, with Colombia, Panama and South Korea, three solid American allies who deserve much better.

In a section headed "Dumb and Dumber" are these comments:

Evidence of a weak president being pushed leftward might cause investors to worry whether he will prove similarly feeble when it comes to reining in the vast deficits he is now racking up; and that might spook the buyers of bonds that finance all those deficits. Looming large among these, of course, are the Chinese.

Under the relevant trade laws, Mr Obama had the absolute discretion not to impose the recommended tyre tariffs on the grounds of overall economic interest or national security. Given everything that is at stake, his decision not to exercise it amounts to an act of vandalism.

If you think, "well, that's just one tariff. What harm could that do?" Here's another article, this one in the Wall Street Journal today, that talks about a similar tariff enacted in the early 1960's that still causes problems and significant waste as businesses find ways to get around the onerous tax that are still in place long after the situation that brought it about has been made moot.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Medicare for All?

The Top Ten reasons Medicare should not be a model for Health Care reform:

1. Medicare is going bankrupt.
2. Private payers are bailing out Medicare.
3. Expansion of entitlement programs threatens our economic security.
4. Low administrative costs are a mirage.
5. Medicare is rife with fraud.
6. Medicare short-changes seniors.
7. Medicare's model is obsolete.
8. Payments are too low.
9. Medical decisions are made in Washington.
10. No one is running the show.

Read the article, which includes an explanation of these reasons, in the September 11, 2009 issue of the Wall Street Journal.

When Obama made his statement about number five in his speech to congress, I immediately asked, "If you know there's fraud, why aren't you doing something about it now? Why must you wait for this obscenely abusive "reform bill" before acting?" Estimates of fraud range from three to ten percent of all health care spending.

"What Were You Thinking?"

The President's Promises

Obama made a lot of bold promises during his speech to Congress last week. He will likely make more on Sunday, when he hits every morning talk show except the one place where he might be asked some probing questions. The question we need answered is, was Joe Wilson right? Is this guy telling us the truth or not? Perhaps you're not one of those "true believers" who accept every word from his mouth. Perhaps you prefer to look at the evidence and make up your own mind. This Editorial at Investor's Business Daily a week ago examines those promises and points out some significant discrepancies. I find it interesting that while Obama spoke all evening about "My Plan," he hasn't revealed any of the details of it. The only bills we can examine are HR 3200 from the House of Representatives, and the proposal by Max Baucus (D-Montana) from the Senate. This one has no Republican endorsement; neither have any endearing features to this reader.

So take a look at the IBD examination of Obama's speech. Make up your own mind. Don't let anyone; politician, personality, reporter, whoever; tell you what you should think about this important issue. If the provisions of HR 3200 and Baucus's bill are passed by congress, get signed into law, and you should happen to live long enough to have to deal with the consequences, you want to at least be able to say "I knew what was coming. I told you so!"

"What Were You Thinking?"

Are we indeed Ignorant?

Nobel laureate Friedrich A. Hayek in The Constitution of Liberty:

"All political theories assume, of course, that most individuals are very ignorant. Those who plead for liberty differ from the rest in that they include among the ignorant themselves as well as the wisest. Compared with the totality of knowledge which is continually utilized in the evolution of a dynamic civilization, the difference between the knowledge that the wisest and that the most ignorant individual can deliberately employ is comparatively insignificant."

This should give us all hope, eh?

Whose Decision?

"Some lives may indeed be impossible to save. But what we have here is a government bureaucracy that has the power to determine—as a matter of policy—not to save lives thatcould be saved. In essence, determining whose life is worth the expense.

The proper, biblical role of government is to protect the well-being of its citizens—to provide security and promote justice, not to usher them into the next world by denying them medical care.

Do we need health care reform? Of course we do; I've said so before. But as Christians, we must not assent to giving unaccountable bureaucrats the power to determine the value of a human life—or to withhold medical care from those whose survival is somehow deemed outside the national interest."

From Charles Colson's Breakpoint column, Sept 18, 2009.

http://www.informz.net/pfm/archives/archive_849993.html to read the entire column.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Lloyd Marcus, American

Read the experiences of a black conservative here; then watch the video.

"What Were You Thinking?"

"Government Can Fix It"

"What Were You Thinking?"

Cancer Treatment or Assisted Suicide?

Who is more sympathetic to the plight of the patient, Big Government or Big Business? Watch this video to the end before you decide.

This is "health-care" in the state of Oregon, a pattern many in the Federal Government think ought to be extended to the rest of the country. Government makes the decisions about treatment, not the doctor, certainly not the patient. I don't think I care to participate, thank you very much. Is this the sort of "health-care" that our president says we are owed as a right? The Declaration of Independence says we have a right "to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Notice that Life comes first; without Life, the others don't mean much.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Health-Care Secrets

There's an old saying in Texas, used when one perceives that he's not being told the truth: "Don't piss in my ear and tell me it's raining!" That's exactly what's going on in town halls around the country. In the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal, there's this little blurb about how the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (chaired by Chris Dodd, D-Conn), passed out an amended $1 trillion health-care bill back on July 15. Earlier this month, Senator Arlen Specter (D-Penn) told a town hall meeting that those opposed to the present monstrous HR3200 are "just wrong; the Senate doesn't have a bill yet." Well, the only true part about that is they haven't turned over their cards yet. The Democrats in the senate have known since the middle of July what they intend to inflict on us, but they haven't seen fit to tell us. They haven't even shared it with the Republican senators. And you really believed these clowns when they promised an "open, transparent government?" Do you really think they want an open, honest government when they pull this sort of crap and then expect to pass the legislation without allowing time for public commentary? My friend, they were peeing in your ear then, and they're doing it now.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Dick Morris on Joe Lieberman

On Tuesday the 25th, Dick Morris wrote a piece on comments by Joe Lieberman (I-Conn) regarding HR 3200 -- the Obama/Democrat Party proposal to reform health care. A couple of interesting paragraphs:

If the elderly are worried about the projected $500 billion cut in Medicare and Medicaid over the ensuing decade and conservatives fret over socialization of healthcare, the average American can relate most easily to the concerns over the size of the debt and the deficit that Lieberman articulates.

Lieberman’s critique gives moderates a place to go in the healthcare debate. Caught in the tug between the liberals who dominate Democratic primaries and the more conservative voices that may prevail in November, centrist Democrats can rally easily around the “not now” approach of Joe Lieberman. It is obvious that, despite the Obama majorities in Congress, this is the exact wrong time to embark on a major new government spending program.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Read the Bill!!

Can you imagine what HR 3200 will do to our National Debt?

"What Were You Thinking?"

Obama's Summer of Discontent

Fouad Ajami has an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal today, pointing out the emptiness inherent in the election of the current occupant of the Oval Office and suggesting that Americans who value substance over style are now coming to understand the enormity of what they have done. I only hope that there are more of us who understand and prefer substance than those who would rather think they can get a free ride off the successful part of the.

Click the link above and read the article; here are the last two paragraphs:

American democracy has never been democracy by plebiscite, a process by which a leader is anointed, then the populace steps out of the way, and the anointed one puts his political program in place. In the American tradition, the "mandate of heaven" is gained and lost every day and people talk back to their leaders. They are not held in thrall by them. The leaders are not infallible or a breed apart. That way is the Third World way, the way it plays out in Arab and Latin American politics.

Those protesters in those town-hall meetings have served notice that Mr. Obama's charismatic moment has passed. Once again, the belief in that American exception that set this nation apart from other lands is re-emerging. Health care is the tip of the iceberg. Beneath it is an unease with the way the verdict of the 2008 election was read by those who prevailed. It shall be seen whether the man swept into office in the moment of national panic will adjust to the nation's recovery of its self-confidence.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Voter Intimidation

So what is it: illegal intimidation of registered voters by thugs, or just another tool in the arsenal of Democrat operatives? Why did the Justice Department, under Attorney General Eric Halder, choose to drop a case against members of the New Black Panther party in Philadelphia, when they had a slam-dunk winner?

President Obama is a lawyer; AG Holder is a lawyer; doesn't it seem odd that these two, both of whom have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution and, by extention, the Law of the Land, have seen fit to ignore this law against voter intimidation?

There are larger questions here, deserving of answers. Wall Street Journalist John Fund provides more information... if you're interested!

"What Were You Thinking?"

Death by Bureaucratic Fiat.

There is an article in the Wall Street Journal today that should be read by anyone who contemplates a need for medical care in their future, and who wonders how they might fare under a nationalized health care system. Obama's independant panel will, under HR 3200, decide who receives care and who does not, and it's not a pretty thing to think about. Imagine yourself coming before the panel, asking for medical care that will save and prolong your life. Imagine their answer.

"What Were You Thinking?"

Democrat's Worst Nightmare

..or maybe it's just a Republican response to ACORN agitators.