" Health Care Reform or Socialized Medicine? "

Reflecting back over the past few months, we have the opportunity to analyze and dissect a vast amount of information, whether fictitious or fact, in reference to the " Health Care Reform Bill ". Congress, in both bicameral Houses, the lower House of Representatives and the upper Senate, at present still have not come to an agreement on which proposal to adopt. There are presently in both Houses different legislation in debate as to which would be more conducive in guaranteeing votes, acquiring control, and even what is best for the American tax paying citizen. We have witnessed the Deadline Date pronounced by the President, come and go, while also enduring the vacillation of so called non-negotiable sections of certain pieces of the legislation. American Citizens listened in disbelief as they were compared to "Astro-Turf", "Nazi's", "Idiots", "Domestic Terrorists" and "Uneducated Buffoon's". We have been awakened to realize the contempt towards the American Tax Payer by many members of Congress, who consider themselves to be Intellectuals and Academics, knowing what is best for the ignorant and naive Citizen. They regard themselves to be the mature and wise parental figures, needing to educate, direct and, if necessary force, the adolescent John and Jane Doe Citizen into what they deem relevant to the benefit of the whole.

I had the opportunity to visit Washington D.C. on business just this past week. While there I toured the Capitol Building and was also able to gain access to both the Senate and House Galleries via passes supplied by my District Representative. I was escorted to a seat in the Senate Gallery as Senator Diane Feinstein of CA., was speaking from the podium promoting a piece of legislation she had co-written. If I remember correctly there where a total of 5 sponsors, one of whom was Senator Barbara Boxer of CA. requesting Federal funding [your Federal tax money] of $250,000.00 for a Civil Rights display in her state. First of all, in my opinion, when it comes to raising funds for a display such as this, you should have the common sense to urge the state of California to bear the expense, and if the state refuses, you would then recommend to the Organization to solicit private donations for the costs. Instead she suggested taking "Pork", from the storage barrel of the American Tax Payer, the over whelming majority of whom do not even reside in that state and most likely, will never visit that display. This may not seem to be a very large sum of money to a few of you, but consider the multiple pieces of legislation which have been adopted with similar intentions and outcomes requiring various amounts of funding. Adding the yearly sum total, I am confident you would find a staggering amount of "Pork" expenditures. Secondly as Senator Feinstein was presenting her arguments for the display, a grand total of 2 other Senators were present in the Chambers. She was speaking to the Madam Chairman while her arguments were being documented. Afterwards a role call was announced and one by one the Senators entered the Chambers, most with an air of Aristocrat's, to register their vote, and then the majority exited just as stealthily as they appeared. During this whole process, beginning with Senator Feinsteins arguments, to the passing of the legislation, not one of the Senators had the courtesy to look up into the Gallery and acknowledge the public viewing the procedure. There were at each doorway people to open and close the doors, as Senators entered and exited, glasses of water were served, documents carried by personal assistants all the while being treated by lower governmental employees as if they, the Senators, were Royalty. After which they were taking a 2 1/2 hour lunch/recess. I write this in order to express my observation and opinion of the unfortunate disconnect being displayed by our elected Representatives towards the very people who elected them to their office, as well as demonstrating the willingness to spend your Federal tax dollars like drunken sailors. There seemed to be present a dominant, totally opposing atmosphere and way of thinking in D.C. as compared to the rest of America. With such a disconnect present and perpetrated, how is it possible for Big Government to maintain, distribute and control health care for the absolute benefit of the American tax paying citizen?. "I threw this section in for free, even though it does not contain talking points on the Health Care Reform Bill"....Now in reference to the Bill...

We listened as President Obama compared his expansion of the public health care option to the U.S. Postal Service, which is reported to be on the path to lose $7,000,000,000.00 by the end of this year alone. He then switched his analogy of the public option by comparing it with the government run Colleges and University systems which always have a deficit and are in need of Tax payer bail outs each year. Americans spend nearly 20% annually of our Gross Nation Product on health care. This is a tremendous amount of money to leave in the control of governmental bureaucrats who have a history of mishandling, misappropriating, wasting, and inefficiency with little to no accountability. Recently a Governmental Accountability Office reported that both Federal and State officials neglected to identify $65,000,000. in Medicaid prescription drug fraud, along with prescriptions written in the thousands to patients who had died or through unscrupulous people pretending to be Doctors. We watch as a dozen or more States are mobilizing to approve legislation to amend their State's Constitution in order to make illegal President Obama's individual mandated health care.

It is reported that President Obama's health care plan will have the bulk of its funding supplied through deep cuts in the Medicare program, to the tune of $500,000,000. This includes a $160-180,000,000. decrease to the Medicare Advantage program which offers enhanced benefits over the standard Medicare plan. Presently there are 10,000,000 reportedly low income seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage alone, as compared to a program labeled Medigap, which is a more expensive option and offers fewer benefits. The facts point to the very good possibility that President Obama has the intentions of cutting the Medicare Advantage option funding in order to appease and reward the AARP officials for their support of his Health Care Reform Bill. This is despite the fact that they do not offer this option to their members but instead offer an option labeled Medigap, which boasts a much higher profit margin in which they collect a substantial amount of revenue. It is also reported that the President has negotiated deals with the Big Drug Corporations in order to acquire their support and advertising for the Health Care Bill, by guaranteeing them very little cuts to their prices and profit margins. How are these back room dealings representing the best interests and concerns of the American Tax payer? Especially in this case, where the previously hard working American senior has already paid into the system for decades as an American Tax Payer. Now, the very person they may have voted into office, wants to give them the shaft. It is truly an Obamanation!!!!

A poll that was conducted by ABC News, USA Today in conjunction with the Kaiser Family Foundation, revealed that 90% of the Americans who cooperated in the poll, signified that they were satisfied with their existing health care coverage. We are on the cutting edge of medical technology and pharmaceutical medicines. We offer the highest standard of health care in the world, with as many as 500,000 people entering the U.S. each year from other countries for purposes of receiving the best and rapidly available treatments and procedures. Americans pay a much lower cost for health care compared to the citizens of other countries which include Canada, Japan, Germany and the majority of the European Union.

The executive editor of The Weekly Standard, Fred Barnes, stated the following facts:

· The two most significant innovations for patient care in the past decade are magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computerized tomography (CT).
· The United States has 27 MRI machines per million Americans.
· Canada and Britain have six MRI machines per million.
· The United States has 34 CT scanners per million.
· Canada has 12 per million and Britain only eight.
Another piece of comparative information revealed by Fred Barnes, which has been published in the medical journal Lancet Oncology, displays the superior Health care offered in America as compared to other countries.
· Survival rate for all cancer patients for Americans — 66.3% for men and 63.9% for women.
· Survival rate for all cancer patients for Europeans — 47.3% for men and 55.9% for women.
· Survival rate for prostate cancer for American men — 99%
· Survival rate for prostate cancer for European men — 77.5%
· Survival rate for colon/rectal cancer for Americans — 65.5%

· Survival rate for colon/rectal cancer for Europeans — 56.2%
· Survival rate for breast cancer patients for Americans — 90.1%
· Survival rate for breast cancer patients for Europeans — 79%

Posting on the Heritage Foundation's blog, "The Foundry", Mr. Franc unveils the details: "During the Senate Finance Committee mark up of the Baucus health bill... Senator Bunning of Kentucky put forth an innovative amendment. This amendment stipulated that before voting on the measure in Committee, legislative language would have to be accessible to the public for 72 hours and that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) would need to publish an official tally of how much this bill will cost the American people and what the real impact will be on health costs."
Mr. Franc continued: "The amendment failed 11-12 on nearly a party line vote. Senator Blanche Lincoln (AR) was the sole Democrat to support this attempt at transparency. The bottom line: when the committee completes its work on this re-make of one-sixth of our economy, Senators will have voted on a phantom - a bill that does not exist with costs that are unknowable until, that is, the unelected legislative draftsmen write the real bill in some back room on Capitol Hill."

Below I have posted a report identifying the American attitude and belief toward their Congressmen in regards to this Health Care Reform Bill, as well as a survey concerning the Health Care debate.

Rasmussen Reports

Only 22% Say Most in Congress Will Understand
Health Care Plan Before They Vote

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

While majority Democrats in Congress struggle to put together a final health care reform plan, just 22% of U.S. voters believe that most members of Congress will understand what is in the plan before they vote on it.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 55% think most members of Congress will not understand what is in the health care plan before casting their vote. Twenty-three percent (23%) aren't sure.

Forty-six percent (46%) of voters say it is at least somewhat likely that most members will have read the health care reform bill proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats before they vote on it, but just 12% say that's very likely to be the case.

Most voters say it's unlikely that most members of Congress will have read the bill before voting: 40% say it's not very likely, and another 13% say it's not at all likely.

This skepticism is fed in part by the fact that most voters think they already understand the health care plan better than the average member of Congress. Fifty-one percent (51%) rate their understanding of the plan as good or excellent but only 22% say the same for Congress.

Nationwide Survey Concerning
The Current Health Care Debate

78.82% of respondents have heard or seen comments from President Obama on the $900 billion government health insurance bill he wants Congress to pass.
49.82% of respondents have a favorable opinion of President Barack Obama. (-0.63%)*
62.45% of respondents believe that, based on what they have seen or heard, the health insurance they have today will be better than the health insurance they will have in the future. (+16.40%)*
40.71% of respondents support President Obama's government-run health insurance plan. (-0.72%)*
51.58% of respondents believe that the new health insurance plans being considered will limit care to older Americans. (+2.41%)*
18.06% of respondents believe that health insurance should pay for abortions. (-1.16%)*
11.66% of respondents want the health insurance plans being considered to cover illegal immigrants. (+1.99%)*
29.80% of respondents would be willing to pay higher taxes to support the new health insurance plans being considered and discussed. (+0.58%)*

*Percent of increase or decrease based upon the results from a ccAdvertising survey conducted on September 10th, 2009

Within this administration's ideology and intent, is the formation of a government run "public option". This will have a mandate to attempt to force employers to provide health insurance to all their employees, including any individuals which are not covered by their employer, and to purchase health insurance or face criminal charges, due to non-compliance of newly written laws which have been implemented. The distribution of such health care services will be the responsibility of a newly formed National Health Rationing Board, whose members are to be appointed by the administration in power. The titled "public option" plan is a misnomer, purposely used to deceive the American public from the true title, which is a "single payer system", just as the title "Federal Reserve Bank" was conceived in lieu of its real purpose, namely the "Centralized Bank of America", but this is a subject for another time. The proponents claim this option is to compete with all the private insurance companies to keep costs low. But in actuality it is the intent to eventually enable full governmental control of health care. This option is ultimately subsidized by the American tax payer, rendering any private insurance companies at a major disadvantage in the ability to remain competitive. Through the legislative policy of public option, along with the taxing of "Cadillac" private insurance policies and the stricter regulation of employer based insurance, it is estimated this will force approximately 120,000,000 Americans to exit their existing personal insurance policies and accept the public option. In the event medical care becomes necessary, under the proposed governmental controlled health care system, we will be mandatorily subjected to the review of appointed Washington Bureaucrats, empowered by law, to dictate approved treatments we may proceed with. As many physicians have stated, due to their experience with government controlled Medicare, our government examines each individual's case in terms of monetary costs, in stead of what treatments, physicians, Hospitals and medicines are available. The government Bureaucrats will decide what method of treatments you will receive, not you or your physician. This, in turn ultimately equates to fewer choices in treatments, medicines, physicians, and flexibility along with refusal of, or postponement of the same. There has also been reporting of a "Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research" with the sole responsibility of determining costs and effectiveness of treatments. In the event this council declared a treatment or medication too expensive for the patient, it would be denied without regard to its ability to improve the standard and quality of life to the patient. It is also noted that the council consists of 15 members, not one being an actively practicing physician........Now be truthful, does this represent an American ideology of Health Care Reform or a Socialized ideology of Health Care Reform?

The American tax paying citizen deserves the best quality Health Care available. It is not a God given right, as in the God given rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but yet an earned privilege, by the sweat of our brow and the fruit of our labors. We have the ability of choosing the desired coverage or non-coverage, which we believe to be appropriate to our needs. I do however agree with the necessity of health care reform, in terms of lowering the costs of health care to the "real cost" of treatment along with substantially lower policy costs while not affecting quality of care. Actively searching out and exposing all the health care fraud, misappropriations, overcharges, abuses, etc. This would allow every American tax payer more affordable access to all the various health care plans available.