See article below.  This is scary.

CathyM
Catren's Shar Pei
Catren's Leather Show Accessories
Kill "The Killing Fields" Bills of the HSUS
www.americanssupportinganimalownership.com

http://www.defendyourhealthcare.us/ 

O'S BROKEN PROMISES
HEALTH BILLS V. PREZ'S WORDS
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY

July 17, 2009 - President Obama promises that "if you like your health plan,
you can keep it," even after he reforms our health-care system. That's
untrue. The bills now before Congress would force you to switch to a
managed-care plan with limits on your access to specialists and tests.

Two main bills are being rushed through Congress with the goal of combining
them into a finished product by August. Under either, a new government
bureaucracy will select health plans that it considers in your best
interest, and you will have to enroll in one of these "qualified plans." If
you now get your plan through work, your employer has a five-year "grace
period" to switch you into a qualified plan. If you buy your own insurance,
you'll have less time.

And as soon as anything changes in your contract -- such as a change in
copays or deductibles, which many insurers change every year -- you'll have
to move into a qualified plan instead (House bill, p. 16-17).

When you file your taxes, if you can't prove to the IRS that you are in a
qualified plan, you'll be fined thousands of dollars -- as much as the
average cost of a health plan for your family size -- and then automatically
enrolled in a randomly selected plan (House bill, p. 167-168).

It's one thing to require that people getting government assistance tolerate
managed care, but the legislation limits you to a managed-care plan even if
you and your employer are footing the bill (Senate bill, p. 57-58). The goal
is to reduce everyone's consumption of health care and to ensure that people
have the same health-care experience, regardless of ability to pay.

Nowhere does the legislation say how much health plans will cost, but a
family of four is eligible for some government assistance until their
household income reaches $88,000 (House bill, p. 137). If you earn more than
that, you'll have to pay the cost no matter how high it goes.

The price tag for this legislation is a whopping $1.04 trillion to $1.6
trillion (Congressional Budget Office estimates). Half of the tab comes from
tax increases on individuals earning $280,000 or more, and these new taxes
will double in 2012 unless savings exceed predicted costs (House bill, p.
199). The rest of the cost is paid for by cutting seniors' health benefits
under Medicare.

There's plenty of waste in Medicare, but the Congressional Budget Office
estimates only 1 percent of the savings under the legislation will be from
curbing waste, fraud and abuse. That means the rest will likely come from
reducing what patients get.

One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a
counseling session every five years (and more often if they become sick or
go into a nursing home) about alternatives for end-of-life care (House bill,
p. 425-430). The sessions cover highly sensitive matters such as whether to
receive antibiotics and "the use of artificially administered nutrition and
hydration."

This mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse
care. Do we really want government involved in such deeply personal issues?

Shockingly, only a portion of the money accumulated from slashing senior
benefits and raising taxes goes to pay for covering the uninsured. The
Senate bill allocates huge sums to "community transformation grants," home
visits for expectant families, services for migrant workers -- and the
creation of dozens of new government councils, programs and advisory boards
slipped into the last 500 pages.

The most recent ABC News/Washington Post poll (June 21) finds that 83
percent of Americans are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the
quality of their health care, and 81 percent are similarly satisfied with
their health insurance.

They have good reason to be. If you're diagnosed with cancer, you have a
better chance of surviving it in the United States than anywhere else,
according to the Concord Five Continent Study. And the World Health
Organization ranked the United States No. 1 out of 191 countries for being
responsive to patients' needs, including providing timely treatments and a
choice of doctors.

Congress should pursue less radical ways to cover the uninsured. We have too
much to lose with this legislation.

Betsy McCaughey is founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a
former lieutenant governor of New York.  



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
This is a Free Speech forum. The owner of this list assumes no responsibility 
for the intellectual or emotional maturity of its members.  If you do not like 
what is being said here, filter it to trash, ignore it or leave.  If you leave, 
learn how to do this for yourself.  If you do not, you will be here forever.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.25/2256 - Release Date: 07/23/09 
06:02:00

Reply via email to