Health Provisions Slipped into Stimulus Package

[CinnScorpStudent]

Politicians to decide what treatment doctors can provide based on $$$

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

[missmoe]

dont look at me, i didnt vote for him. infact i was saying that exactly this was going to happen! there is not one gov. run program in this country that runs well (wellfare, ss, unemployment etc etc etc) so why will gov run health care be any different?? i know that the current problems w the insurance companies was bad too, but not like this. how is it fair that someone with an education, a good job, and what used to be decient benefits (and had the ability to pay out of pocket if they so choose) is now going to have the exact same coverage as someone who has never worked a day in their life, lives off welfare and ss? im not saying that i am better than anyone but i have made smart choices so that i dont have to worry about alot of this stuff. it just doesnt make sence to me that i have to take what the gov gives me and can not pay for any more if i want to because i would be getting better treatment than someone else who never worked for anything?

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

on february 9, rush limbaugh repeated a falsehood from a bloomberg "commentary" by betsy mccaughey, headlined "ruin your health with the obama stimulus plan." in the commentary, mccaughey falsely claimed that under provisions in the economic recovery bill passed by house democrats, "[o]ne new bureaucracy, the national coordinator of health information technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. the goal is to reduce costs and 'guide' your doctor's decisions." in fact, the language in the house bill that mccaughey, a former lieutenant governor of new york, referenced does not establish authority to "monitor treatments" or restrict what "your doctor is doing" with regard to patient care, but rather addresses establishing an electronic records system such that doctors would have complete, accurate information about their patients "to help guide medical decisions at the time and place of care."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200902100001

iow lt. gov mccaughey is a prevaricator.

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

Okay, now let me give a different example.

My grandfather is 92 years old, still drives, is active in the community college orchestra, and swims everyday in the summer. He was just diagnosed with Aortic Valve Stenosis and needs to have a heart cath. and valve replacement. Two very intensive surgeries. He carries his own insurance and is no drain on the government as he was wise with his retirement. Under this new Universal Healthcare Plan, not only would he not be allowed to have this surgery because he is certainly too old, but he wouldn't have the choice of paying out of pocket for it either. The only way he could get this surgery would be to go to a different country that does not have universal health care. (sounds eerily familiar to Canada and the UK) .

Evidence to support your assertions?

There is a myth that with national health insurance the government will make the medical decisions. But in a publicly financed, universal health care system, medical decisions are left to the patient and doctor, as they should be. This is true even in the countries like the U.K. and Spain (or in U.S. systems like the VA) that have socialized medicine.

In a public system, the public has a say in how it's run. Cost containment measures are publicly managed at the state level by elected and appointed agencies that represent the public. This agency decides on the benefit package and negotiates doctor fees and hospital budgets. It also is responsible for health planning and the distribution of expensive technology. Thus, the total budget for health care is set through a public, democratic process. But clinical decisions remain a private matter between doctor and patient.

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php#rationing

Single payer is not socialism. Socialised finance is not the same as government ownership of clinics etc.

If we are going to have a market based system for health care the market should be that the providers are competing for patients based on quality of care. (Best is usually not the most expensive. Primary care oriented delivery models deliver better care at lower cost on average.) If anything we should have primary care providers acting as gatekeepers for access to specialists.

Our systemic performance does not look very effective when compared to that of other industrialized countries.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=482678

The U.S. already rations care. Rationing in U.S. health care is based on income: if you can afford care, you get it; if you can't, you don't. A recent study by the prestigious Institute of Medicine found that 18,000 Americans die every year because they don't have health insurance. Many more skip treatments that their insurance company refuses to cover. That's rationing. Other countries do not ration in this way.

...

The rationing that takes place in U.S. health care is unnecessary. A number of studies (notably a General Accounting Office report in 1991 and a Congressional Budget Office report in 1993) show that there is more than enough money in our health care system to serve everyone if it were spent wisely. Administrative costs are at 31% of U.S. health spending, far higher than in other countries' systems. These inflated costs are due to our failure to have a publicly financed, universal health care system. We spend about twice as much per person as Canada or most European nations, and still deny health care to many in need. A national health program could save enough on administration to assure access to care for all Americans, without rationing.

at http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php#rationing

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

key findings

• among the four clinical conditions studied—myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, coronary artery bypass grafting, and pneumonia—higher technology scores were generally associated with decreased adjusted odds ratios for fatal hospitalizations.
  
• among all hospitalizations, a 10-point increase in automation of notes and records was associated with a 15 percent decrease in the adjusted odds of hospital death.
  
• hospitals with more advanced order entry capability experienced decreases of 9 percent and 55 percent, respectively, in the adjusted odds of death for myocardial infarction and coronary artery bypass graft procedures.
  
• facilities with higher scores in decision support were associated with a 16 percent decrease in the adjusted odds of complications for all causes of hospitalizations.
  
• for nearly all clinical conditions, higher scores on automated test results, order entry, and decision support were overwhelmingly associated with lower hospital costs.
  

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=796345iow with automated medical records in place you are much more likely to leave the hospital alive.....

[FLmomof5]

And you can't listen to Obama and get an answer.

His statement that there is no pork in this bill is equivalent to Clinton's statement that he " did not have sex with that WOMAN!". His statement that a BJ is her having sex with him not vice-versa! :icon_roll

Obama is intentionally attempting to frighten the public so that he can pass this package of crap. When confronted on the truth, he prevaricates. He NEVER answers the question asked. His whole campaign was empty promises with NO details.

We are in for a heck of a ride.

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

dont look at me, i didnt vote for him. infact i was saying that exactly this was going to happen! there is not one gov. run program in this country that runs well (wellfare, ss, unemployment etc etc etc) so why will gov run health care be any different?? i know that the current problems w the insurance companies was bad too, but not like this. how is it fair that someone with an education, a good job, and what used to be decient benefits (and had the ability to pay out of pocket if they so choose) is now going to have the exact same coverage as someone who has never worked a day in their life, lives off welfare and ss? im not saying that i am better than anyone but i have made smart choices so that i dont have to worry about alot of this stuff. it just doesnt make sence to me that i have to take what the gov gives me and can not pay for any more if i want to because i would be getting better treatment than someone else who never worked for anything?

You are 23 there is no guarantee that you won't have a need for greater services down the road d/t ill health or whatever. Never assume that you are immune to bad luck because "I have made smart choices."

There is absolutely nothing in evidence that you would not be able to access other health care services with this proposal. If anything the French have better access to care. (See "Health of Nations." at prospect.org)

Despite what you have heard on Rush Limbaugh there are government programs that run reasonably well. (SS pays out retirement benefits for about 3 cents/hundred dollars paid. vs 401 K 's that eat about 30% of returns through rapacious fees.)

[herring_RN, ASN, BSN]

Please read this section:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:2:./temp/~c111ECAMrE:e216072:

and/or the entire HR bill:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1eh.txt.pdf

PLEASE explain how there is language that would over ride a physicians decision to order a mammogram for a woman with a family history as the for profit insurance company did. I cannot find it.

This happened to my friend too. She was in her forties. Her mother had died of breast cancer. Sister was being treated, and her aunt had a five year survival.

She choose to pay $80.00 for a mammogram. The insurance company paid for her double mastectomies and radiation.

She was unsuccessful in court in trying to get the mammogram paid for.

But 13 years later she is a healthy nurse working full time.

It was NOT the government. It was the insurance industry.

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

I wouldn't worship at the altar of Saint Ronnie. The long term economic data since WWII shows that Democratic Administrations yield better economic results than GOP administrations (See Larry Bartels work and that of Paul Krugman.). In the 28 years of the Supply Side model we have seen flat wages and declining economic mobility...

Theodore Roosevelt advocated for a National Health Care Plan during his presidency.....

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

but how many people would get health care under the 65% subsidy? pelosi asked the non-partisan congressional budget office that question, and she got her answer last night.

7 million adults and dependent children would get the subsidized cobra by the end of this year, the cbo told pelosi in a letter available on their web site. another 1.2 million people also would get health coverage under the house stimulus, the cbo said, thanks to a provision that secures medicaid coverage for low-income workers who lose their jobs and have no other option.

unfortunately, the senate didn't touch the medicaid issue in their stimulus. and something tells me senators won't be eager to debate the health care benefits in the two competing bills, because it's a fight the house will win.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/house-stimulus-plan-would-provide-health-care-to-82-million.php

its far more important that the stimulus package preserved access to health care for 8 million americans.

[Meredith09]

Uh, yeah. And the government, according to this plan deceptively put into a "stimulus" bill, will dictate to your doctor what he can and can't do to treat YOU. He will be required to follow the government's protocol, regardess of his own critical thinking skills. He will be required by law or not allowed to practice. This is the truth, folks. Look it up for yourself. When it comes home to you or a family member, and it not some hypothetical situation, you will finally get it.

Absolutely. This is outrageous, and it makes me even more nervous about entering the nursing profession...which is in itself depressing, because I am soooo looking forward to it in most other respects! :angryfire

[herring_RN, ASN, BSN]

Absolutely. This is outrageous, and it makes me even more nervous about entering the nursing profession...which is in itself depressing, because I am soooo looking forward to it in most other respects! :angryfire

I posted links to the bill.

PLEASE quote the language you refer to.

I cannot find it.

[Quark09]

awsmom8,

You just proved my point. You said "We just can't afford to treat everyone with all the advances in medicine today." Nobody is asking you or us to pay for him, he has been responsible and taken care of himself and doesn't need the system to pay for him. But under this new healthcare plan, we will not have a choice. Everyone will have to be part of this plan unless you want to leave the country.

Hears another example. I'm 28 and had a right thyroid lobectomy performed in Dec. My physician found the mass in November when I was getting my physical for nursing school. Under this new system, I would most likely still be waiting for testing because at the time the mass was found, it was inconclusive whether it was malignant or benign. I wouldn't have been able to get into nursing school and could've waited up to a year for the surgery. All based on the government's decisions. The government isn't the answer to all of our problems. As much as people would like to think they are the smartest and brightest. The majority of them are elected into office because they rubbed the right elbows and most have never run a business of their own.

Let this be your 92 year old Grandfather, or 76 years old for that matter, and we'll see how you feel. I would never expect for you to be able to put yourself in my situation though because liberals are just to close minded.

Don't worry, you all will get what you voted for. And when you lose your freedoms as you know them, your always looking at the other side of the fence mentality will kick in, and you'll be complaining again.

"You Liberals" LOL I love it ;-)