Health care Debate.

Well research and thank you. I wish I could find the article from Georgia's Health Department where she found, in studying the 'Universal Health Care' 'mandated' for all states to start using it, actually would cost the insured MORE money than they are paying now, and those with pre-existing medical conditions, according to the bill as it was 'passed before knowing what it contained', actually requires the first $12k out of POCKET paid BEFORE it would kick in to cover less than 50% of what is left. She also noted that this care, NONE of what is covered, has a definite ceiling of payments, PERIOD! So there goes that fantasy of everyone being cared for with THIS law.

She also was surprised to find that if a person was unable to get covered, they were sent to another government agency and THEY suggest you put some of your health earnings into an account to help with your health needs. Hump, isn't that the same thing Bush was talking about? Interesting they hid that portion from the public, wouldn't want anyone to think the Republicans had something RIGHT, would they? Wish I could remember where I found this interview, I will check around, but for now, school awaits.

WND has an article about just how wonderful National health care is. In May a Pastor had a heart attack and was sent to hospital in Canada. He suffered brain damage from lack of oxygen before he could be revived. Now the "Consent and Capacity" board has decided that he will never recover so they are refusing to give him food or water. This despite the fact that a fellow pastor, who visits him daily, reports he has regained some use of his arms, can speak a few words and recognize people he knows. The only way they will feed or hydrate him is "...if the attending physician hears Pastor Mayandy make a capable request for food or water, he will be fed and hydrated." So if he asks a nurse for water, that's not good enough. It has to be his attending doctor, and it has to be a CAPABLE request. What exactly does that mean? If he croaks out "water", will that be capable? Sounds like they have decided to kill him rather than pay for him.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=195621

Here's an article about a group trying to save him...

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/news/article/866362--tedsnyder

Well we found out the death panels were real. That goes to show just how far they will lie.

Update! Apparently the bad press thanks to WND's report, along with the lawsuit from the human rights group, has resulted in the hospital allowing the Pastor to receive food and water. They claim he went without for nine days, which is hard to believe, somebody must have been slipping him water at least.

Now the "Consent and Capacity" board had decided to remove all his support, including a feeding tube and IV on the grounds he'd never recover, and let him starve to death. Now that implies that he'd always need a feeding tube to stay alive doesn't it? Surprisingly enough the nurse sent from the Pastors church to feed him did so by spoon. So, not only did he apparently recover enough to go from feeding tube to spoon fed, he did that over nine days of being starved to death.

The hospital and Ontario officials claim that the fact that Ontario is $20 billion in debt had nothing to do with the decision to starve the man to death. It should also be noted that this respite doesn't change the original ruling, so they could decide to starve him again at any time.

That is good news. eber322! God WILL provide!

You post that on SyFy? Lol do it see how long it takes MBG to remove it.

Done. Posted in the Soylent Green thread.

LMAO

Holy shiester MBG did not delete it. She actually thought it was funny. I thought for sure she would delete it.

Actual I have to wonder if she didn't read this thread here and that's why she left it.

Yes the irony!
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/11/14/health-care-reform-group-gets-waiver-from-health-care-reform/
Now why would anyone need to get a waiver from utopia?

ford plasko wrote:

Yes the irony!
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/11/14/health-care-reform-group-gets-waiver-from-health-care-reform/
Now why would anyone need to get a waiver from utopia?

I wonder if this whole thing was not a scam on the American people? Look at it I figure they know it cannot be paid for. Hopefully the republicans can overturn this.

This is life on bizzaro world these days.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-cuba-banned-sicko
I mean what next,Global Warming activist in Cancun freezing their butts off? Oh right that did happen.

ford plasko wrote:

This is life on bizzaro world these days.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-cuba-banned-sicko
I mean what next,Global Warming activist in Cancun freezing their butts off? Oh right that did happen.

Florida 2 years in a row have had freezing weather.

Listening to Hannity he was saying 45 doctor owned hospitals in the USA will not be able to open because of Obamacare. Something to do with medicare certification.

FYI, the last blood test my MIL had before she passed (like the NIGHT before) showed she was still suffering from the TTP (that pesky Plavix side effect) and her FIRST hospital should NEVER have released her, nor should the hospital after that. But it all came down to how much more Medicare was gonna keep paying for (wouldn't even allow her the blood transfusion that IS shown to cure it!) No 'Death Panels' my ARSE!

You should be watching Glenn Beck right now on how China is overtaking America and this is by design by the Obama administration.

Quote :

Federal Judge Rules Health Law Violates Constitution
By KEVIN SACK
Published: January 31, 2011



¶ A second federal judge ruled on Monday that it was unconstitutional for Congress to enact a health care law that requires Americans to obtain commercial insurance, evening the score at two-to-two in the lower courts as conflicting opinions begin their path to the Supreme Court.
Times Topics: Health Care Reform


¶ Like a Virginia judge in December, Judge Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, Fla., said he would allow the law to remain in effect while the Obama administration appeals his ruling, a process that could take two years. But unlike his Virginia counterpart, Judge Vinson ruled that the entire health care act should fall if the appellate courts join him in invalidating the insurance requirement.

¶ “The act, like a defectively designed watch, needs to be redesigned and reconstructed by the watchmaker,” Judge Vinson wrote.

¶ In a 78-page opinion, Judge Vinson held that the insurance requirement exceeds the regulatory powers granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Judge Vinson wrote that the provision could not be rescued by an associated clause in Article I that gives Congress broad authority to make laws “necessary and proper” to carrying out its designated responsibilities.

¶ “If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain,” Judge Vinson wrote.

¶ In a silver lining for the Obama administration, the judge rejected a second claim that the new law violates state sovereignty by requiring states to pay for a fractional share of a Medicaid expansion that is scheduled for 2014.

¶ Judge Vinson, the first judge to address that question, dismissed the contention that states were being illegally coerced by the federal government. He said they always have the option, however impractical, to withdraw from Medicaid, a joint state and federal insurance program for those with low-incomes.

¶ The judge’s ruling came in the most prominent of more than 20 legal challenges to some aspect of the sweeping health law, which was enacted last year by a Democratic Congress and signed by President Obama in March.

¶ The plaintiffs include governors and attorneys general from 26 states, all but one Republican, as well as the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents small companies. Officials from six states joined the lawsuit this month after shifts in party control brought by November’s elections.

¶ The ruling by Judge Vinson, a senior judge appointed by President Ronald Reagan, solidified the divide in the health litigation among judges named by Republicans and those named by Democrats.

¶ In December, Judge Henry E. Hudson of Federal District Court in Richmond, Va., who was appointed by President George W. Bush, became the first to invalidate the insurance mandate. Two other federal judges named by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, have upheld the law.

¶ The Florida plaintiffs ensured they would draw a Republican-appointed judge by filing the lawsuit in Pensacola.

¶ Like Judge Hudson before him, Judge Vinson declined to enjoin the law and ruled that it could remain in place pending appeals. The insurance requirement, known as the individual mandate, does not take effect until 2014.

¶ Judge Vinson had telegraphed his leanings last year in a preliminary ruling and in comments from the bench during a pair of hearings. His opinion hangs on a series of Supreme Court decisions that have defined the limits of the Commerce Clause by granting Congress the authority to regulate “activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.”

¶ The plaintiffs in the Florida case characterized the insurance requirement as an unprecedented attempt to regulate inactivity because citizens would be assessed an income tax penalty for failing to purchase a product. Their lawyers argued that there effectively would be no limits on federal authority, and raised the specter of government-mandated gym memberships and broccoli consumption.

¶ Justice Department lawyers, representing the Obama administration, asserted that a choice to not obtain health insurance is itself an active decision. Taken in the aggregate, they said, those decisions place a heavy economic burden on hospitals, governments and privately insured ratepayers that absorb the cost of uncompensated care for those without coverage.

¶ In his decision, Judge Vinson wrote: “It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause.” If Congress has such power, he continued, “it is not hyperbolizing to suggest that Congress could do almost anything it wanted.”

¶ The Pensacola case now likely heads to the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, considered one of the country’s most conservative appellate benches. The Richmond case is already with another conservative court, the Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, which has set oral arguments for May.

¶ That court will consider diametrically opposed rulings from courthouses 116 miles apart, as it was a judge in Lynchburg, Va., Norman K. Moon, who issued one of the two decisions upholding the law. Meanwhile, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati is already receiving briefs on the other decision backing the law, which was delivered by Judge George C. Steeh in Detroit.

¶ Although Judge Vinson’s ruling will have no instant effect on implementation, it further arms Republicans in Congress who are waging a fierce campaign against the health care act. The new Republican majority in the House voted early this year to repeal the law, a largely symbolic measure that is given no chance in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

¶ The Obama administration argues that the insurance mandate is essential to its goals of covering more than 30 million uninsured and offering protections to those with pre-existing health conditions. Unless everyone is required to have insurance, the administration contends, consumers might simply wait until they are sick to enroll, undercutting the actuarial soundness of risk pooling and leading to an industry “death spiral.”

¶ But the mandate’s legal and political problems have prompted a few Democratic senators to join Republicans in exploring alternatives that would encourage citizens to buy insurance without requiring it.

¶ For instance, people could be given a narrow window to enroll, and those who miss the deadline would face lengthy waiting periods for coverage. Alternately, those who apply late and are eligible for government tax credits under the law coverage could be penalized through a reduction of their subsidies.

I am new here, and did not read over the entire thread so forgive me , if I repeat anything somebody else said. But I think I can give some additional REAL insight to how this is affecting the medical business right now. My and the hubby took over the family business about 3 years ago. I run it . He owns it, and is head medical director for our techs. We are a very small Mobile Ultrasound company. We go to standing locales, prisons, house patients and nursing homes. We were doing okay about 3 years ago. And then the cuts started happening. We used to have 2 full time and one part time office staff and 3 full time and 1 part time ultasound techs. They have continually cut our reimbursements over the last 3 years to the point of where we are now. 1 full time office staff and 1 part time and 1 full time ultrasound tech and 1 part time.
Everything that is my overhead has gone up massivlely and the goverment charges me more unemployement tax because of all the former employees that are on unemployment. It is not just us, we know of at least three other small providers in our area that are no more.

The same studies that we perform are done at hospitals and they are still be paid twice the rate we are. Then you have the fact that the hospitals have created out patient services sites and are able to still get paid the rate of being in a hospital simply because they own it. The healthcare reform has scared most of our doctors to death. The older ones are trying to sell off their practices and retire and the newer ones are trying to squeeze every penny of their existing patient's , by charging for things that were always complimentary before. Like a copy of medical records being faxed or mailing a duplicate statement to you. The big picture of healthcare reform is socialism. They want everybody to have to go to hospitals and the goverment wants to have control over those hospitals. This is their way of putting everybody else out of business. If they weren't , then they would be cutting the reimbursement's for hospitals OPPS as much as they are for non OPPS. Everybody will eventually lose their family doctor's, not immediately but that will happen. Every doctor that we work with sees the writing on the wall, they are not happy with it, but their is nothing that they can do.

First of all, Welcome Graybrew. It is always nice to see 'new' people. So welcome once again.

Now, I would also like to further thank you for your personal insight to how this healthcare is REALLY affecting people, those that are NOT in the government NOR a hospital. From the rate of employee loss (in hours to say the least) one can also see how the 'MYTH' of more employment being brought on FROM this healthcare scam...I mean healthcare law for the good of ALL people.

Again, thank you again.

Walterth3rd wrote:

First of all, Welcome Graybrew. It is always nice to see 'new' people. So welcome once again.

Now, I would also like to further thank you for your personal insight to how this healthcare is REALLY affecting people, those that are NOT in the government NOR a hospital. From the rate of employee loss (in hours to say the least) one can also see how the 'MYTH' of more employment being brought on FROM this healthcare scam...I mean healthcare law for the good of ALL people.

Again, thank you again.

Thanks for the Welcome.

Here's another tidbit. Since me and the hubby are owner's of the business. When we are cash poor , we don't pull paychecks, so we are not paying our own unemployment. So , if we do go under we won't be eligible for unemployment. Lots of small business owners are the same way. So.... we don't count. At least not according the goverment when it is looking at unemployment numbers. And yes, it is a total rackett. Let's take over healtcare and hire a bunch more people into the goverment so that we can say we gave 1 million jobs and just not talk about the 8 million or so we lost.

Same thing with the store my wife owned, she went without health insurances to make ends meet and thins only got worse! BTW, there was never any bailout for ANTIQUE STORES!

The goverment will never give a bailout to any company that does not profit them. This is why the school's have been left to twist in the wind. They already control them and will profit nothing from giving them anymore money. The Banks, Auto and Ins. industry's were the most profitable industry for many years and now they have there hand in it. The only one they could not , was the extremely profitable Medical industry. Up until , they screwed with it. Now it is in shambles. And they not only will get there hand's in it, but they want to take it over. And they will. Unless this country can turn back right and get rid of the radical left wing socialists that are taking over our coutry. But that is just IMHO. j/k . this sucks.

If the goverment was about profit then they would be very rich by now. The goverment dosen't undersand profit. 99% of goverment are lawyers who have never had a job!! Never had to make a payroll!! Never made a deal or had to get investors that had to get payed back!! They have been planning their lives since they were about 10. Go to college then law school then run for office. and if that didn't work, work for Dad who is already in goverment.

We are all probably screwed. :bom: