Looking Forward to Government Health Care!!

[injest]

because we will ALL be going to the lovely and comfortable public clinics...yes, shoved in like cattle and treated with less respect...sneered at by indifferent government workers who can not be fired and have no supervisors (or none that are apparent)

just a preview from the various countries that have government health care now..

Man dies after ambulance detour

The family of a man who died after an ambulance driver diverted to the depot instead of going to hospital has criticised the medic.

Ali Asghar, a father of four, died shortly after arriving in hospital from a suspected heart attack after suffering a stroke at his home.

His family are demanding answers to whether the 69-year-old, from Stockton on Tees, Cleveland, would have survived if he had been taken straight to hospital.

Mr Asghar's youngest son, Mohammed, 33, said he was not aware of the delay in the ambulance arriving at hospital but told the Daily Mail: "If that has happened it shouldn't have.

"If you have a patient in an ambulance you don't worry about your bloody shift finishing. The driver should not get away with it. He should have to pay for it. He is responsible for the death. The time he took to detour could have saved my father's life."

It emerged that the ambulance driver complained to a colleague that he was 15 minutes past the end of his duty and wanted to clock off. It is said, he got out of the ambulance without even telling his replacement there was a critically sick case being tended by another medic in the back. The new driver headed to the hospital as quickly as he could - but the detour had added half a mile to the journey.

The driver, a paramedic, and the medic who was in the back, an advanced technician, have since been suspended as health chiefs investigate the delay.

Ambulance controllers took a call about Mr Asghar, who lived just three miles from the North Tees Hospital at 3.52pm on May 18. The crew were alerted to a Category A life-threatening incident and arrived at his home at 3.57pm. After assessing the patient they left for the hospital at 4.13pm - for a journey taking around 10 minutes.

Instead the driver headed to his depot where he got out with the patient remaining in the back of the ambulance with the technician until the new driver took the wheel. The vehicle then left the depot and arrived at the hospital at 4.27pm. As soon as the patient got to A&E doctors administered CPR but were unable to save him. The delay was reported by the new driver who was just starting his shift.

A spokesman for North East Ambulance Service said: "This incident was immediately reported to us by another member of staff and as soon as we were notified, we acted to suspend a paramedic and an advanced technician from duty. We appointed a senior officer to carry out a full investigation of the incident and have notified the North East Strategic Health Authority, Stockton-on-Tees Teaching Primary Care Trust and the Health Professions Council of our actions."

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_3353093.html?menu=

now if the man knew he was going to get overtime, and the company was getting enough money to pay overtime, the patient may be alive today.

[Mrs. H]

Not!  I love my PPO.

[injest]

Not!  I love my PPO.

sorry, sister!! in line with ya!!

[injest]

I just think that we are the greatest country in the world...SOME of our health care is good..why tear IT down to improve other people's health care??

I am not one that thinks everything is a zero sum game...there is no need to take from one to give to another...what we need is INSURANCE reform...not health care..we HAVE the best health care system, we just need to make it available to more people.

[Arcadianmemories]

if you love the US post office, the VA hospital system, and FEMA - you will just love Obamacare.

[injest]

if you love the US post office, the VA hospital system, and FEMA - you will just love Obamacare.

I have taken my mother to the public health care facilities here in East Texas...terrifying to think I may wind up in them..

[Mrs. H]

http://keithhennessey.com/2009/06/08/kennedy-health-bill/

Understanding the Kennedy health care bill
by Keith Hennessey (formerly a senior White House economic advisor to President George W. Bush.)

Over the weekend a draft of Senator Kennedy’s (D-MA) health care bill leaked.  After playing with Adobe Acrobat, here is the text of the draft Kennedy bill as a text file (173 K), and as a single Acrobat file (3.4 MB).  Update:  I fixed the broken link to the PDF. Unlike the leaked version, both of these are searchable.

[If I have time, I'll add the links Hennessey included in his article.]

Calling it the “Kennedy” bill is something of an overstatement.  Senator Kennedy chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee, and his staff wrote the draft.  By all reports, however, Chairman Kennedy’s health is preventing him from being heavily involved in the drafting.  Senator Reid has designated Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) to supervise the process, but as best I can tell, it’s really the Kennedy committee staff who are making most of the key decisions.  For now I will call it the Kennedy-Dodd bill.

As the committee staff emphasized to the press after the leak, this is an interim draft.  I assume things will move around over the next several weeks as discussions among Senators and their staffs continue.  This is therefore far from a final product, but it provides a useful insight into current thinking among some key Senate Democrats.

Here are 15 things to know about the draft Kennedy-Dodd health bill.

1.  The Kennedy-Dodd bill would create an individual mandate requiring you to buy a “qualified” health insurance plan, as defined by the government.  If you don’t have “qualified” health insurance for a given month, you will pay a new Federal tax.  Incredibly, the amount and structure of this new tax is left to the discretion of the Secretaries of Treasury and Health and Human Services (HHS), whose only guidance is “to establish the minimum practicable amount that can accomplish the goal of enhancing participation in qualifying coverage (as so defined).”  The new Medical Advisory Council (see #3D) could exempt classes of people from this new tax.  To avoid this tax, you would have to report your health insurance information for each month of the prior year to the Secretary of HHS, along with “any such other information as the Secretary may prescribe.”

2.  The bill would also create an employer mandate.  Employers would have to offer insurance to their employees.  Employers would have to pay at least a certain percentage (TBD) of the premium, and at least a certain dollar amount (TBD).  Any employer that did not would pay a new tax.  Again, the amount and structure of the tax is left to the discretion of the Secretaries of Treasury and HHS.  Small employers (TBD) would be exempt.

3.  In the Kennedy-Dodd bill, the government would define a qualified plan:

     A.  All health insurance would be required to have guaranteed issue and renewal, modified community rating, no exclusions for pre-existing conditions, no lifetime or annual limits on benefits, and family policies would have to cover “children” up to age 26.

     B.  A qualified plan would have to meet one of three levels of standardized cost-sharing defined by the government, “gold, silver, and bronze.”  Details TBD.

     C.  Plans would be required to cover a list of preventive services approved by the Federal government.

     D.  A qualified plan would have to cover “essential health benefits,” as defined by a new Medical Advisory Council (MAC), appointed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.  The MAC would determine what items and services are “essential benefits.”  The MAC would have to include items and services in at least the following categories:  ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and new born care, medical and surgical, mental health, prescription drugs, rehab and lab services, preventive/wellness services, pediatric services, and anything else the MAC thought appropriate.

     E.  The MAC would also define what “affordable and available coverage” is for different income levels, affecting who has to pay the tax if they don’t buy health insurance.  The MAC’s rules would go into effect unless Congress passed a joint resolution (under a fast-track process) to turn them off.

4.  Health insurance plans could not charge higher premiums for risky behaviors:  “Such rate shall not vary by health status-related factors, … or any other factor not described in paragraph (1).”  Smokers, drinkers, drug users, and those in terrible physical shape would all have their premiums subsidized by the healthy.

5.  Guaranteed issue and renewal combined with modified community rating would dramatically increase premiums for the overwhelming majority of those Americans who now have private health insurance.  New Jersey is the best example of health insurance mandates gone wild.  In the name of protecting their citizens, premiums are extremely high to cover the cross-subsidization of those who are uninsurable.

6.  The bill would expand Medicaid to cover everyone up to 150% of poverty, with the Federal government paying all incremental costs (no State share).  This means adding childless adults with income below 150% of the poverty line.

7.  People from 150% of poverty up to 500% (!!) would get their health insurance subsidized (on a sliding scale).  If this were in effect in 2009, a family of four with income of $110,000 would get a small subsidy.  The bill does not indicate the source of funds to finance these subsidies.

8.  People in high cost areas (e.g., New York City, Boston, South Florida, Chicago, Los Angeles) would get much bigger subsidies than those in low cost areas (e.g., much of the rest of the country, especially in rural areas).  The subsidies are calculated as a percentage of the “reference premium,” which is determined based on the cost of plans sold in that particular geographic area.

9.  There would be a “public plan option” of health insurance offered by the federal government.  In this new government health plan, the federal government would pay health care providers Medicare rates + 10%.  The +10% is clearly intended to attract short-term legislative support from medical providers.  I hope they are not so naive that they think that differential would last.

10.  Group health plans with 250 or fewer members would be prohibited from self-insuring.  ERISA would only be for big businesses.

11.  States would have to set up “gateways” (health insurance exchanges) to market only qualified health insurance plans.  If they don’t, the Feds will set up a gateway for them.

12.  Health insurance plans in existence before the law would not have to meet the new insurance standards.  This creates a weird bifurcated system and means you would (probably) be subject to a different set of rules when you change jobs.

13.  The bill does not specify what spending will be cut or what taxes will be raised to pay for the increased spending.  That is presumably for the Finance Committee to determine, since it’s their jurisdiction.

14.  The bill defines an “eligible individual” as “a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence or an alien lawfully present in the United States.”

15.  The bill would create a new pot of money for state gateways to pay “navigators” to educate people about the new bill, distribute information about health plans, and help people enroll.  Navigators receiving federal funds “may include … unions, …”

This would have severe effects on the more than 100 million Americans who have private health insurance today:

-- The government would mandate not only that you must buy health insurance, but what health insurance counts as “qualifying.”

-- Health insurance premiums would rise as a result of the law, meaning lower wages.

-- A government-appointed board would determine what items and services are “essential benefits” that your qualifying plan must cover.

-- You would find a tremendous new disincentive to switch jobs, because your new health insurance may be subject to the new rules and would therefore be significantly more expensive.

-- Those who keep themselves healthy would be subsidizing premiums for those with risky or unhealthy behaviors.

-- Far more than half of all Americans would be eligible for subsidies, but we have not yet been told who would pay the bill.

-- The Secretaries of Treasury and HHS would have unlimited discretion to impose new taxes on individuals and employers who do not comply with the new mandates.

-- The Secretary of HHS could mandate that you provide him or her with “any such other information as [he/she] may prescribe.”

I strongly oppose this bill.

[Arcadianmemories]

-- The government would mandate not only that you must buy health insurance, but what health insurance counts as “qualifying.”

-- Health insurance premiums would rise as a result of the law, meaning lower wages.

-- A government-appointed board would determine what items and services are “essential benefits” that your qualifying plan must cover.

-- You would find a tremendous new disincentive to switch jobs, because your new health insurance may be subject to the new rules and would therefore be significantly more expensive.

-- Those who keep themselves healthy would be subsidizing premiums for those with risky or unhealthy behaviors.

-- Far more than half of all Americans would be eligible for subsidies, but we have not yet been told who would pay the bill.

-- The Secretaries of Treasury and HHS would have unlimited discretion to impose new taxes on individuals and employers who do not comply with the new mandates.

-- The Secretary of HHS could mandate that you provide him or her with “any such other information as [he/she] may prescribe

_________________________________________________

In short, this is essentially an Insurance Protection Racket for the insurance lobby who contributed heavily to the Obama campaign, no wonder they aren't opposing it as they did Hillarycare in 1993. Not only is it an involuntary tax on the healthy to subsidize the unhealthy, a tax on the young to subsidize the elderly, but it is also a tax on those low cost / low tax states and areas in order to continue to subsidize high tax / high cost states and areas.

I think that we can also view this as another aspect of the looming California Bail Out Plan, a huge chunk of the California budget problem lies in their unfunded mandates to float their generous health care programs for the "poor".

I guess if GM is too big to fail, then California and the larger urban areas throughout the nation are also too big to fail.