These guys will be in charge of health care...

[billc]

Looks like the lords and ladies of congress took care of themselves when everything started to melt down...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ials/2012/06/24/gJQAnQPg0V_story.html?hpid=z1

Boehner is one of 34 members of Congress who took steps to recast their financial portfolios during the financial crisis after phone calls or meetings with Paulson; his successor, Timothy F. Geithner; or Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, according to a Washington Post examination of appointment calendars and congressional disclosure forms.
The lawmakers, many of whom held leadership positions and committee chairmanships in the House and Senate, changed portions of their portfolios a total of 166 times within two business days of speaking or meeting with the administration officials. The party affiliation of the lawmakers was about evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, 19 to 15.
The period covered by The Post analysis was a grim one for the U.S. economy, and many people rushed to reconfigure their investment portfolios. The financial moves by the members of Congress are permitted under congressional ethics rules, but some ethics experts said they should refrain from taking actions in their financial portfolios when they might know more than the public.

No, I am not surprised, stunned or any number of words that one would use to talk about this topic. However, it still amazes me that people still want the lords and ladies of congress in charge of the most important aspects of their lives, essentially surrendering control of such things as their healthcare to people like this...

 

[blindsage]

We already do.

Highest lobbying dollars by industry 1998-2012:
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=i

Pharmaceuticals/Health Products	$2,391,621,180
Insurance	$1,699,161,386
Electric Utilities	$1,600,414,206
Business Associations	$1,351,249,863
Computers/Internet	$1,294,604,594
Oil & Gas	$1,263,754,098
Education	$1,112,756,769
Misc Manufacturing & Distributing	$1,095,542,084
Hospitals/Nursing Homes	$1,022,622,396
Civil Servants/Public Officials	$974,791,719
TV/Movies/Music	$969,072,305
Real Estate	$936,908,135
Securities & Investment	$932,317,598
Health Professionals	$901,128,872
Air Transport	$856,688,964
Misc Issues	$747,807,971
Telephone Utilities	$723,071,109
Automotive	$705,223,398
Telecom Services & Equipment	$675,281,922

 

[K-man]

Silly me. I always thought it was you guys that elected these people into office. Don't you have the ability to elect independents?

 

[WC_lun]

Billi, can you tell me exactly how congress members will be in charge of healthcare? I've read most of the bill and think myself pretty up to date on the reform, but no where did I see where congress people were making any medical decisions, or really any financial ones other than funding the program...which has already been done. I know there is a board of doctors that will review procedures to make sure they are in line with modern medical practices and deemed neccessary procedures, but they aren't congressmen. i've seen this claim about congress controlling healthcare. I just don't see it, so maybe you can clear it up for me.

As far as the financial wrangling they have been doing, you are right, it is pretty disgusting. Many congressmen have been using inside information to hedge thier investment bets, which for the layperson would result in prison sentences and/or fines. There was a bill in congress not long ago attempting to curtail thier use of inside information, but I don't know what happened to it. I imagine it died waiting for a vote.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Silly me. I always thought it was you guys that elected these people into office. Don't you have the ability to elect independents?

Yup... and "we" don't. We're our own worst enemy and will likely be our own extinction event. Right now we have a VERY qualified candidate for US President in Gary Johnson. He's a successful, former 2 term governor of New Mexico with a proven track record of fixing problems like the ones plaguing our nation right now. Unlike the other two who garner all the media attention...

Instead of supporting Gary Johnson (an independent), the masses seem to flock to a failed one term governor-corporate patsy, or the current failed amateurish, narcissitic socialist president.

Meanwhile, everyone is unhappy with the current state of affairs yet refuse to change anything they've done in the past that led to the eclection of failed leaders who created the same mess that everyone is pissed off about!??!

I know... we're obviously insane and suicidal.

Gary Johnson 2012... Stop the Insanity!

 

[K-man]

It's funny the way politics works. The average person is not 'rich' or even 'wealthy'. Compare that to the average politician. I'm meaning at the national level. This is not endemic to the US but probably more so than Australia and possibly Britain.

To run for President costs millions. I'm not sure you ever get value for money. It is the only reason I can accept the Monarchy for Australia. We don't have to elect anyone as head of our Commomwealth and we can have a person recognised for their intelligence and achievements appointed as our Head of State. If we were to move away from the Monarchy and adopt Presidential system of government, then we would end up with another bloody politician as Head of State and I can think of nothing worse. And, just look at the money we save. We even have a budget surplus!

God Save the Queen! ... and I'm not even a Monarchist. :s131:

 

[Tez3]

It's funny the way politics works. The average person is not 'rich' or even 'wealthy'. Compare that to the average politician. I'm meaning at the national level. This is not endemic to the US but probably more so than Australia and possibly Britain.

To run for President costs millions. I'm not sure you ever get value for money. It is the only reason I can accept the Monarchy for Australia. We don't have to elect anyone as head of our Commomwealth and we can have a person recognised for their intelligence and achievements appointed as our Head of State. If we were to move away from the Monarchy and adopt Presidential system of government, then we would end up with another bloody politician as Head of State and I can think of nothing worse. And, just look at the money we save. We even have a budget surplus!

God Save the Queen! ... and I'm not even a Monarchist. :s131:

I agree, I'm not a monarchist either but having a non politican with a wealth of experience of dealing with politicians as head of state makes things a good del less complicated. Having a neutral head of state to whom the military, the police and the Civil Service swears allegiance to rather than a government is also a better idea. It'a sll about checks and balances, because of the existance of each other neither the government nor the monarchy can take over the country.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Welcome to ObamaCare, which those of you who defended it said would not happen.

http://www.ajc.com/health/task-force-to-doctors-1464659.html

Task force to doctors: Obesity screening for all

Experts also advise counseling at-risk patients on diet, exercise
By Kathleen Doheny and Reviewed by Brunilda Nazario, MD
WebMD Health News

Next time you see your doctor, be prepared to be weighed and measured -- and possibly referred to a weight loss program.
In an updated recommendation, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), an independent panel of experts, is recommending that doctors screen all patients for obesity.

The task force also recommended universal screening in its previous 2003 recommendation, but the new one goes a step farther, says David Grossman, MD, MPH, a USPSTF member who is also medical director for preventive care at Group Health Research Institute in Seattle.

It recommends that doctors refer obese patients to intensive counseling for weight loss.

"The doctor should help identify a suitable weight reduction program in their community that the doctor could refer them to," says Grossman.

In a separate recommendation, the task force is also advising doctors to counsel certain other at-risk patients who aren't obese about better lifestyle choices.

Oh, don't worry - it's all voluntary. TODAY.

Tomorrow? Yeah, right.

And don't even start with that crap about how it won't happen. All the things the hand-wringers said would not happen, like the above, ARE happening. Slippery slope argument? You bet your ***. And it's true.

If you're a fatass (as I am), heave to and prepare to be boarded. You are going to be told how to live your life - for the good of society.

 

[WC_lun]

Let's see, you have an issue with a recomendation that doctor's refer thier obese patients to wieght loss programs for the benefit of thier health? That kinda comes under the heading of Duh! Medical journals and the AMA have been making that same reccomendation for years and no one seems to have an issue with it, because it comes under the heading of common sense. Now the moment they make it mandatory that overwieght people are involuntarilary committed to wieght loss programs I will stand up and be right beside you in condeming it. Until then this sounds more like a board of doctors stating the obvious and some people using scare tactics.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Let's see, you have an issue with a recomendation that doctor's refer thier obese patients to wieght loss programs for the benefit of thier health? That kinda comes under the heading of Duh! Medical journals and the AMA have been making that same reccomendation for years and no one seems to have an issue with it, because it comes under the heading of common sense. Now the moment they make it mandatory that overwieght people are involuntarilary committed to wieght loss programs I will stand up and be right beside you in condeming it. Until then this sounds more like a board of doctors stating the obvious and some people using scare tactics.

Just another brick in the wall. Wait until they do make it mandatory. You'll protest - maybe - but it will be too little, too late.

It already happened at a previous employer of mine. First, all employees had to be 'screened' for medical problems. However, no one had to take action on the 'recommendations' they received.

Then, instead of recommendations, they were given 'referrals'. Still, nothing happened if they did not follow through on the referrals.

Then, they were told that if they received a referral and failed to successfully complete the recommended program, their co-pay would be raised by an additional $100 per doctor visit.

Then, they were told it was mandatory that they successfully complete any recommended program they were referred to in order to keep their health insurance benefits.

That sucked. However, private insurance, private employer. At least people had the theoretical choice to buy their own insurance, find another job, get insurance through their spouse if they were employed elsewhere, etc.

When the government is in charge, and the taxpayers must pay the bill, that choice will be gone. All the downside, none of the choice.

I predict this. Anyone who doesn't see it coming is ... [redacted]

 

[WC_lun]

Here's another way of looking at it, the board made the same reccomendation as many medical journals and the AMA so that the insurance carriers would have to cover weigth loss programs. You know, doing thier job. I get it though, some people like to be afraid and want others to share that experience with them.

 

[billc]

As to who is in charge of healthcare...

Billi, can you tell me exactly how congress members will be in charge of healthcare? I've read most of the bill and think myself pretty up to date on the reform, but no where did I see where congress people were making any medical decisions, or really any financial ones other than funding the program..

Well first, it was these geniuses who came up with obamacare and voted to put it into effect. Then you mentioned the doctors on the medical panel making the decisions...

I know there is a board of doctors that will review procedures to make sure they are in line with modern medical practices and deemed neccessary procedures,

Where do you think these doctors will come from. They will be appointed by the government, the government will pay their salaries, the government will set their guidelines and have oversight of their activities. These doctors will be political appointments, not medical appointments, just like everything else in government. The congressmen with oversight will be the ones making the important decisions, not the doctors.

As far as insurance goes, it is mandates from the government forcing insurance companies to cover weight loss mandates, and birth control mandates, and cosmetic surgery and sex change operations and everything each pressure group wants insurance to pay for that inflates health insurance costs to begin with.

This article covers several issues in one...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/08/01/free.birth.control/index.html

HHS OKs birth control with no co-pay

But Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, said Monday's decision may result in increasing the cost of coverage for consumers.
Though AHIP supports evidence-based preventive services, Ignagni warns the recommendations would "broaden the scope of mandated preventive services beyond existing evidence-based guidelines, suspend current cost-sharing arrangements for certain services, and encourage consumers to obtain a prescription for routine supplies that are currently purchased over-the-counter."

So, someone put the HHS secretary in place, someone gave her her marching orders and then she implemented the policy directive. Her underlings implement what she tells them to do so yes, these jerks in congress will be in control of your health care wether you see the connection or not.

 

[billc]

From CNN on what we are going to lose under obamacare...

http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/health_care_reform_obama.fortune/

If you prize choosing your own cardiologist or urologist under your company's Preferred Provider Organization plan (PPO), if your employer rewards your non-smoking, healthy lifestyle with reduced premiums, if you love the bargain Health Savings Account (HSA) that insures you just for the essentials, or if you simply take comfort in the freedom to spend your own money for a policy that covers the newest drugs and diagnostic tests -- you may be shocked to learn that you could lose all of those good things under the rules proposed in the two bills that herald a health-care revolution.
In short, the Obama platform would mandate extremely full, expensive, and highly subsidized coverage -- including a lot of benefits people would never pay for with their own money -- but deliver it through a highly restrictive, HMO-style plan that will determine what care and tests you can and can't have. It's a revolution, all right, but in the wrong direction.

Now, it isn't doctors making these decisions, nor are they implementing them. They are just one small cog in the healthcare machine under obamacare. The people in congress,as well as the President, will be in charge of your healthcare, not the doctors...

The bills in both houses require that Americans...

 

[elder999]

From CNN on what we are going to lose under obamacare...

Now, it isn't doctors making these decisions, nor are they implementing them. They are just one small cog in the healthcare
machine under obamacare.

We aren't going to lose anything under obamacare.

SCOTUS will probably overturn the insurance requirement Thursday, at the very least. Thing's gonna fall apart after that......

 

[billc]

And here is another example of who will be in control of your healthcare...

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/95631/supreme-court-case-medicaid-california-affordable-care-act

As it stands, Douglas is no longer about Medicaid rates or “meaningful access,” but whether Medicaid beneficiaries and providers have the right to sue the state to enforce federal Medicaid statutes—and, in a surprising move, the Obama administration has sided with California, with the Deputy Solicitor General arguing before the Court today that only the Department of Health and Human Services should be able to enforce compliance with Medicaid. “They want the prerogative of when and where to intervene in state conduct matters,” says Sara Rosenbaum, a law professor and health care expert at George Washington University, venturing a guess as to the administration’s motives. California’s backers also worry about court-imposed payment schemes replacing state discretion, as well as a surge in litigation.

For emphasis...

he Obama administration has sided with California, with the Deputy Solicitor General arguing before the Court today that only the Department of Health and Human Services should be able to enforce compliance with Medicaid. “They want the prerogative of when and where to intervene in state conduct matters,”

 

[blindsage]

"Obamacare" is a give away to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. See the #1 and #2 industries on my first post. They love it. Government is already controlling your healthcare. Congress and the President (Bush and Obama) are bought and paid for to keep manipulating policy in favor of these industries and their profits. The one thing those industries absolutely do not want is single-payer government provided, or even a just a public option for health care, because either option would cut into their profits significantly. They will continue to spend billions and billions to control our politicians and our perceptions of the issue.

 

[WC_lun]

Blindsage has more of the truth of it than most conservatives I hear. If government controls healthcare it will only be at the behest of the insurance and healthcare lobbyist. Both healthcare and insurance companies are at record profits right now and the healthcare reform will do nothing but improve those profits. I am not sure the safeguards, which the panel of doctors are one, will be enough to keep patients rights in the forefront.


If you believe you are in control of your healthcare now, you are niave. If you have insurance, the insurance dictates the treatments you can and cannot have. Until 2014, if you become ill, insurance companies can and often will drop you if you become ill, even if you have paid your premiums for years. If you do not have insurance you had better be rich, or your financial status does effect your medical care. Sure, you can get emergency medical care. However, doctors will very often not write orders for preventative procedures or medications for patients that do not have insurance or well to do. Sometimes even life saving procedures such as transplants are denied patients unless they can show an ability to pay.

Funny thing about this "Obamacare." If you take seperate parts of the reform, explain them to people, %75 support those individual parts, with the exception of it being mandatory. It is also not a Democratic plan at all, but rather a Republican one. A plan that had a lot of support in congress until Obama decided to use it. Then it became "obamacare" and a socialist plot. Politics became more important than people...once again.

 

[Master Dan]

Let's see, you have an issue with a recomendation that doctor's refer thier obese patients to wieght loss programs for the benefit of thier health? That kinda comes under the heading of Duh! Medical journals and the AMA have been making that same reccomendation for years and no one seems to have an issue with it, because it comes under the heading of common sense. Now the moment they make it mandatory that overwieght people are involuntarilary committed to wieght loss programs I will stand up and be right beside you in condeming it. Until then this sounds more like a board of doctors stating the obvious and some people using scare tactics.

This is typical of the GOP line whats wrong with the Health Care Reform Bill yet the poll today showed that 57% to 75% of all republicans when asked were in favor of most of the provisions protecting people from being Excluded for getting sick or excluded for prexisting conditions and many other issues? My wife and I could never leave the extreme area we live in becasue if she change employment she would loose coverage yet living here there are no good doctors or clinics may die either way?

I am pissed Obama didn't fight and get single payer which would have eliminated the need for all these insurance companies that are the true death panels figuring out how to not give coverage, its cheaper to let old people go terminal than treat them on and on but since he took over a million in campain funds from the insurance industry its no wonder we did not get it. Also for those who scream it creates a large burocracy no it does not we have Medicade and Medicare it would fold into that for far less than what we all pay now.

Our Senate and Congress gets the best health care money can buy they frankly don't care they are covered. On single payer the federal government will state what they are going to pay for drugs, proceedure ect. The rich can still pay more to special doctors or clinics if they want but 100 million or more people will be covered instead of all of us paying for people who use the emergency room for unpaid health care visits? It would seem this makes more sense than the individual mandate which to me seems a windfall to the insurance companies except for the other protection provisions.