Questions for the Congress
Our friends at the Heritage Foundation welcome the opportunity for open discussion on the Healthcare issue. With the debate in full swing, there are ongoing questions that all the congressmen should be asked.
The facts related to the Liberal agenda and links are also included thanks to Heritage.org
Can you promise me that I will not lose my current plan and doctor?
President Obama says it is “not legitimate” to claim the “public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system.” But Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman have all admitted that the public option will inevitably lead to government-run health care. The independent and non-partisan Lewin Group estimates that about 83.4 million people would lose their private insurance if Obamacare became law.
Can you promise that you and your family will enroll in the public plan?
Members of Congress and their families currently receive health care through the popular, and completely public-option-free, Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) which allows members of Congress to choose between 283 private health insurance plans. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) proposed an amendment that would require all members of Congress and their staffs to enroll in the newly-created public health insurance plan. His amendment passed by just one vote in the Senate Health Committee. In the House, Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) offered a similar amendment and all 21 Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee voted it down. If the public plan is so great, then Members of Congress should by willing to forfeit their private coverage and join the millions of Americans who would be moved into the public plan.
Can you promise that Obamacare will not lead to higher deficits in the long-term?
President Obama said that he would not support health care legislation that would add to the national deficit. But Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Elmendorf has stated that the House health care legislation would “generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget window.” To help Obama keep his promise, Rep. Patrick Tiberi (R-OH) offered an amendment that would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to submit an annual report to the President and Congress, comparing the expected revenue and spending under the bill’s provisions for the upcoming 10-year period. In the event that projected spending under the bill outpaced revenue, the Secretary would have to reduce spending so that it would not exceed revenue. Democrats defeated Tiberi’s amendment.
Can you promise that government bureaucrats will not ration health care for patients on the public plan?
President Obama promised on July 22 that health care reform would keep the government out of health care decisions, but both the House and Senate bills call for an increased role of comparative effectiveness research (CER). More information on health care effectiveness is good as long as doctor’s and patients are the ones empowered to use that information. Conservatives in both the House and Senate offered amendments prohibiting the use of CER by government to mandate, deny, or ration care. These anti-rationing amendments were defeated in both the House and Senate.
Can you promise me that my tax dollars will not fund abortions?
The House bill, as currently drafted, allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to outline the minimum benefits that must be included in any health plan. There is no specific provision in the bill that would require insurance coverage of abortion. However, since the decisions over benefits are left to the Secretary of HHS, with recommendations from a newly created Health Care Benefits Advisory Committee, there is nothing to prevent the current or future Secretary from including abortion coverage in Americans’ health insurance. Conservatives in both the House and Senate offered amendments that would prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. The tax payer funded abortion bans were defeated in both the House and Senate.
Since none of them will be able to offer reasonable answers to any of these questions, we are hopeful that more and more Americans will see through this charade being played by Obama and his fanatical friends.
The facts related to the Liberal agenda and links are also included thanks to Heritage.org
Can you promise me that I will not lose my current plan and doctor?
President Obama says it is “not legitimate” to claim the “public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system.” But Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman have all admitted that the public option will inevitably lead to government-run health care. The independent and non-partisan Lewin Group estimates that about 83.4 million people would lose their private insurance if Obamacare became law.
Can you promise that you and your family will enroll in the public plan?
Members of Congress and their families currently receive health care through the popular, and completely public-option-free, Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) which allows members of Congress to choose between 283 private health insurance plans. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) proposed an amendment that would require all members of Congress and their staffs to enroll in the newly-created public health insurance plan. His amendment passed by just one vote in the Senate Health Committee. In the House, Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) offered a similar amendment and all 21 Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee voted it down. If the public plan is so great, then Members of Congress should by willing to forfeit their private coverage and join the millions of Americans who would be moved into the public plan.
Can you promise that Obamacare will not lead to higher deficits in the long-term?
President Obama said that he would not support health care legislation that would add to the national deficit. But Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Elmendorf has stated that the House health care legislation would “generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget window.” To help Obama keep his promise, Rep. Patrick Tiberi (R-OH) offered an amendment that would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to submit an annual report to the President and Congress, comparing the expected revenue and spending under the bill’s provisions for the upcoming 10-year period. In the event that projected spending under the bill outpaced revenue, the Secretary would have to reduce spending so that it would not exceed revenue. Democrats defeated Tiberi’s amendment.
Can you promise that government bureaucrats will not ration health care for patients on the public plan?
President Obama promised on July 22 that health care reform would keep the government out of health care decisions, but both the House and Senate bills call for an increased role of comparative effectiveness research (CER). More information on health care effectiveness is good as long as doctor’s and patients are the ones empowered to use that information. Conservatives in both the House and Senate offered amendments prohibiting the use of CER by government to mandate, deny, or ration care. These anti-rationing amendments were defeated in both the House and Senate.
Can you promise me that my tax dollars will not fund abortions?
The House bill, as currently drafted, allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to outline the minimum benefits that must be included in any health plan. There is no specific provision in the bill that would require insurance coverage of abortion. However, since the decisions over benefits are left to the Secretary of HHS, with recommendations from a newly created Health Care Benefits Advisory Committee, there is nothing to prevent the current or future Secretary from including abortion coverage in Americans’ health insurance. Conservatives in both the House and Senate offered amendments that would prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. The tax payer funded abortion bans were defeated in both the House and Senate.
Since none of them will be able to offer reasonable answers to any of these questions, we are hopeful that more and more Americans will see through this charade being played by Obama and his fanatical friends.
Labels: healthcare reform, Obama
posted by Anonymous at 5:31 AM
11 Comments:
The facts related to the Liberal agenda
I see we're back to full lather. If we all accepted these "facts" as facts, there'd be no debate.
Then again, we alla accept the "facts" of evolution ... well, never mind.
It's funny you mention evolution.
I was just thinking how "rugged individualism," the myth of the self-made man, and faith in the power of an unfettered market to solve social problems, which are central to the conservative mind set, sound a lot like survival of the fittest.
Then I recalled that the history of ideas tells us why they sound the same, but I won't bore you with the details.
Interesting questions, but not all valid.
Of course the left wants one government health plan. It has never been about medical care, it is greater government power. They expect to croud out private care.
The political left will carve out a different plan for themselves and grandfather their options.
Future budgets cannot be written by todays congress. Political gaming of the future budget will cause any plan to get more expensive. Look at medicare.
Abortion will be covered, now or in the neer future. The moral priorities of the left are not those of traditional values.
We are slipping more and more to a democracy, away from the constitutional republic we were founded upon. Our decline has started and is likely beyond the point of no return. Populist democracy will degrade into anarchy or tyranny.
I guess that means that the right doesn't care about actual care, but more about the money involved.
From Thomson Reuter report released today showing how the health care industry wasters (or defrauds) $800 billion per year...
* Unnecessary care such as the overuse of antibiotics and lab tests to protect against malpractice exposure makes up 37 percent of healthcare waste or $200 to $300 billion a year.
* Fraud makes up 22 percent of healthcare waste, or up to $200 billion a year in fraudulent Medicare claims, kickbacks for referrals for unnecessary services and other scams.
* Administrative inefficiency and redundant paperwork account for 18 percent of healthcare waste.
* Medical mistakes account for $50 billion to $100 billion in unnecessary spending each year, or 11 percent of the total.
Wow, $200B/year in fraud committed by doctors? No wonder so many of them are against a public option.
The majority of the medical fraud is in Medicare and Medicaid. So if you are in the busineess of commiting fraud, the public option will likely be a fresh source of easy money. Need assistance? Contact Acorn.
Is there really any reason to trust congress that is currently ruled by huge Liberal majorities and the Obama administration in regards to health care reform? How can anyone trust a political party that endorses the killing of innocent, unborn infants? If they can rationalize the killing of the the unborn, will rationalized killing of the living be far behind? The answer is "Yes!" Long waiting lines for care and rationed care will cause the deaths of many Americans.
Slim,
Again, your opinions are based on uninformed Limbaughish propaganda.
As an Administrator of a FQHC, what you refer to as "rationed care", and the picture you paint of it could not be further from the truth.
Each year we help countless uninsured maintain their health. We manage chronic illnesses and keep them from further declining the health of persons who simply can not afford insurance.
We cut down on the number of unwarranted ER trips, saving the ER for what it is intended for.
And guess what my uninformed adversary, we dont "kill any innocent babies", nor do we refer to any "clinics" that do.
FQHC's are HRSA's model of what government sponsored health care can and should be, and we do it efficiently, effectively and comprehensively, and we do it for far less expenditure than many private practices of comparable size.
The only pitfall we truly face at this time is the ragged, tired, inefficient, broken state medicaid enrollment system that your man Mitch supposedly fixed by privatizing it when a patients medical needs exceed the ability of our resident doctors and the referral doctors who donate in-kind services to our clients.
Do a little research into FQHC's, you may be surprised to find out that type of systems works, and works well, and does so with a relatively small expenditure.
I would even be more than glad to give you a tour and let you see first hand.
Slim, I want you to express your views as loud and as often as possible. Especially the part about abortion. It helps my party. Thank you.
Dan, please call me. TCY
www.toddyoungforcongress.com
Todd Young? Someone wants a political donation! Have you see the issues list on this guy's website? It's hilarious(ly bad).
Post a Comment
<< Home