Obamacare Update

During his 30 April 2013 press conference President Obama claimed that Obamacare is proceeding along just fine and that it’s made health insurance “stronger, better, more secure than it was before.”  That claim, however, does not square with reality.  For starters check this link:   

http://blog.heritage.org/2013/05/01/morning-bell-president-says-obamacare-is-going-great/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell  And, then this one:  http://www.redstate.com/2013/05/02/obamacare-is-not-living-up-to-its-promises-and-even-the-media-knows-it/

 

During a Senate Finance Committee hearing the week of 20 April 2013, Democrat Senator Max Baucus (a key player in the development of the legislation) backed off his long time support for the law when he told Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, "I just see a huge trainwreck coming down." It is obvious that he was frustrated with the poor responses Sabelius gave in answer to his questions.  As the author of the next link notes, "Baucus still contends that Obamacare was a good idea in its conception. Only its implementation, he explains, is faulty". The author adds, "Well, he's half right. For it was misconceived, too. In place of simplicity, Americans got complexity. Instead of a clear, simple reform, Americans are getting a vast bureaucracy that would make one of Rube Goldberg's machines look like a model of efficiency."

http://townhall.com/columnists/paulgreenberg/2013/04/27/the-trainwreck-called-obamacare-n1579904/page/full 

See also: http://townhall.com/columnists/halscherz/2013/05/04/obamacare--democrats-when-the-going-gets-tough-they-just-get-going-n1586931?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

 

The 2 May 2013 edition of the New England Journal of Medicine released a study entitled "The Oregon Experiment — Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes." This link provides a brief synopsis. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1212321  Among other things the author of the next link provides an assessment of the consequences of the study.  He notes that the study "finds that (as far as physical health is concerned) there is no difference between being in Medicaid and being uninsured."  He adds that "The study released this week is not the first study to find that enrollees in Medicaid do no better than the uninsured. In fact there are studies that show that Medicaid enrollees find it more difficult to get a doctor's appointment and have worse outcomes than the uninsured."  So if the underlying principle of Obamacare is to expand Medicare to many millions is fundamentally flawed, why are we being forced to accept it with all its well documented warts, cost increases and erosion of our total healthcare system?  See this:  http://townhall.com/columnists/johncgoodman/2013/05/04/study-devastating-for-obamacare-backers-n1586429 

And this:   http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/05/new_study_shows_medicaid_doesnt_affect_health_outcomes.html

 

For many Americans there will be significant negative implications.  Consider this quote from the next link.   “...according to Congressional Budget Office projections in July and September 2012, three million people will lose their insurance altogether in 2014 due to the law, and six million will have to pay the individual-mandate tax penalty in 2016 because they don’t want or won’t be able to afford coverage, even with the subsidies.” Adding in jobs lost, and the reduction of hours available to part-time workers, as many as “30 million to 40 million people [will be] damaged in some fashion by the Affordable Care Act – more than one in 10 Americans.”  Remember the original idea was to get up to 30 million uninsured people into the healthcare system.  Even that goal will not be reached.  Given these facts and more, the damage being done will exceed by a large measure those the law was supposed to help.  See here: http://www.humanevents.com/2013/04/30/the-glitches-and-bumps-of-obamacare/  And here: http://www.redstate.com/2013/05/02/obamacare-is-not-living-up-to-its-promises-and-even-the-media-knows-it/

 

And here's more regarding the increased costs, loss of jobs and employers cutting back on hours in order to keep their businesses viable.  A recent report issued by "the Society of Actuaries (SOA) estimates that the average medical-claims cost in the individual insurance market — the actual cost of treating a person — will increase by an average of 32 percent once Obamacare is fully implemented. Some states will see much greater increases."  See here:  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/345841/obamacare-forecast-we-all-pay-more  The situation businesses face as a consequence of Obamacare is outlined in the next link.  But here is a taste: "Obamacare is behind the surge in part-time employment as corporations have been cutting hours worked and hiring more part-time workers to make up the difference."  Good for workers, huh?  They don't get insurance through their employer and get to work fewer hours to boot. http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2013/05/04/obamacare-affects-parttime-employment-yet-again-n1586936/page/full/  Here are a few more examples of harm to workers:  http://news.investors.com/050113-654209-companies-cut-employee-benefits-as-obamacare-looms.htm?p=full.  And, I thought the President and the crafters of Obamacare told us it would be great for workers.

 

There's more where this came from but I think you get the idea.  For the sake of our future health and welfare everyone must give their elected representatives an earfull and demand that Obamacare be repealed and that they start over.  Far too much time and money has already been wasted on what is obviously a grossly flawed law. The goal this time around should be affordable, effective and efficient healthcare for all Americans, not an expensive, ineffective and inefficient government controlled bureaucratic monstrosity. This time before they even start work they must remove from the premises 95% of the high powered lobbyists who last time rammed throught their pet projects/money making schemes - they won and a large swath of healthcare consumers lost.  The remaining 5% will represent the full spectrum of healthcare professionals (ie; insurers, pharmaceuticals, medical device manufacturers, medical researchers, etc.) "supporting" on the ground healthcare "providers" and healthcare "consumers".  Center the new law's development around the full spectrum of "real" face-to-face professional healthcare providers and healthcare consumers in developing affordable, rational, patient/doctor centered healthcare solutions.  Eliminate any thought of making it a government centric system - no back room deals like last time for legislators or sweetheart deals for unions or big business interests.  And, this time all members of Congress must read and understand the entire law and engage in full, open and honest floor debates before they vote on it.  It should be no larger than 2-300 pages in length.  And, this time, too, they must live up to the broken promise that citizens (and the balance of healthcare professionals not involved in its development) will be given ample opportunity to review the draft legislation and provide comments prior to and during floor debates.  Once this totally transparent process is complete then and only then should Congress finalize the legislation and vote on it.  NO MORE WE MUST PASS IT SO YOU CAN SEE WHATS IN IT!!!  We have been there and done that, Ms. Pelosi.  No dice this time around.

 

George Burns