Nationalizing Health Care: The Path to Total Control (part 3)
Democrat Health Care: Total Control of Your Life
Well. The Democrats have spent enough of your tax dollars to purchase 60 votes to bring the Senate health care bill to the floor for debate. Odds are it will cost hundreds more $millions to pass it. Too bad the president is busy lecturing Afghanistan on corruption to deal with it here.
We know that the health care bill isn’t about improving health care; lowering the cost of health care, or improving delivery of health care. We know this, because the legislation does none of these.
It’s not about improving health care
The best health care system in the world is about to be junked. Soon it will be run like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Amtrak.
Bubba says the one who pays the fiddler calls the tune. That means neither you nor your doctor will be deciding anything about your health care. Bureaucrats will be telling doctors what they can and can’t do. Standard of care indeed; a much lower standard of care. Spread the misery.
Government employees making your health decisions: think incompetent, obnoxious, factotums with power – the Transportation Security Administration Agents at the airport looking out for your “air safety”. Think IRS agents helping to insure you are doing your part to preserve liberty. Soon all doctors and hospitals as extensions of the government will be delivering the same friendly, high-quality service for your breast and prostate exams.
Yeah, you can keep your doctor. If he’s still practicing medicine in the asylum.
It’s not about lowering the cost of health care
The argument is that we are spending too much on health care because those with health insurance have to pay for the cost of those who don’t have the insurance just go to the emergency room. So the Democrat Party’s answer to this problem is to require those who have insurance pay for the health insurance of those who would otherwise just go to the emergency room. For liberals the problem IS the solution! Neat.
In order to accomplish this brilliant maneuver they want to create more than 100 new boards, and give government employees access to all your medical information. (We know how careful government employees are with your private information: remember Dan the Plumber, remember the Pentagon Papers, remember CIA leaks on the front page of the New York Times?) Give bureaucrats not doctor’s decision-making power over who gets which procedures, and spend another $2 trillion over the next ten years. What could go wrong?
It’s not about covering everyone with health insurance
Mr. Obama says he can cut $425 billion in waste and fraud in Medicare over the next 10 years. Hooah! Let’s do that now. That would save us $42.5 billion a year. Then let’s add the $54 billion a year we can save through tort reform limiting junk medical malpractice awards making the total available now to $96,500 billion. A year.
Simple math; divide $96,500 million a year by the highest possible estimate of people in the U.S. without health insurance – 35,000,000 – and you get $2,757 per person. This amounts to $11,028 to pay for health insurance for a family of 4 covering every individual in the United States said to be without health insurance. How much will this cost in addition to what we already pay? Zip. Why not do it this way? Because the Democrat health care plans are not about lowering the cost of health care. They would rather spend a couple $trillion for other reasons. It’s all about control.
Government-provided health care – the loss of freedom
Rationing will happen because the government will budget a specific amount for health care services; and then in order to approximate the budget they will deny, delay, and dilute medical services based on their budget, not yours.
We have already seen how a government panel will use the new Democrat health care legislation – if passed and signed by the President – as a means to denying access to health care; they recommended delaying access to mammograms for more than a decade, then using the diagnostic tool only half as frequently as in the past.
Screening for breast cancer is a preventative measure; denying and delaying it INSURES more cases of breast cancer. Denial or delay of treatment is bad enough, but taking steps to guarantee more women get cancer is just too much. But there’s a reason for it.
More cases of breast cancer and more deaths, means that by killing off more people the Democrats will save hundreds of $millions on health care now; and hundreds of $billions later by not having to provide Medicare and Social Security for so many people. A twofer money saving tactic. This is how liberals do cost-cutting.
Rationing of health care in the U.S. will become an issue of bureaucratic fiat rather than personal economic decision-making.
The Democrat plan removes choice. You cannot choose what you want so it fits your own situation; and you do not have the choice to purchase only what you can afford. Nor can you choose to use any procedure available to treat your diagnosis.
Since the government will be in control of what is covered, they may choose not to pay for the birth of Down Syndrome babies. It’s their choice, not yours.
Physicians and hospitals will have no choice but to comply with what the bureaucrats want because the government writes the checks. Doctors apparently will keep the choice to go into another profession. The doctors who would stay in such an enterprise for a long term will probably come only from the same bottom 20% of the graduating class as public schoolteachers. Probably produce the same result as well.
Delay PSA tests, deny physical examinations, deny coverage for certain prescriptions that are too expensive, control which citizens get fined or jailed for non-compliance, raise the amount of the fines, raise the taxes on ‘Cadillac’ health plans, lower the amount that constitutes a ‘Cadillac’ plan and so on. God, please let the fools who think someone else is going to pay for this survive long enough to lament the day of their folly.
The Second Amendment will be controlled by the health care apparatchiks at the National Institutes of Health, because guns can cause damage to people, and therefore is a health issue.
What you eat will also come under the control of bureaucrats, and these decisions will be made politically. Just wait until the international agri-business corporations get to work on various Representatives and Senators to set out what constitutes a good diet. They will be in the position of forbidding certain products for sale; and placing taxes on stuff they don’t like. Got to look out for your health, you know.
They already do as much as the law allows – tobacco taxes fund all kinds of things the government wants to do. They don’t want people to quit smoking; they just want to use the industry as a money generating machine to fund what the Democrats want to impose. Got to keep the money coming in. Next it will be soft drinks, whole milk, ice cream, coffee. See part two of this series to look at the kinds of taxes the government already imposes on your freedom.
The kind of car or truck you drive will become a health care issue. How fast you can drive, and where. Air quality will be a health care issue meaning that the backyard barbecue will alternatively be taxed, or forbidden altogether.
You can expect that government inspectors will be arranging to come into your home to insure safety. If they’re going to pay for it, they have the right to control it. They will be checking your stairs for safety, how hot the water heater is, the deck, cleaning chemicals – all of it. Think of it as your personal visit by an OSHEA bureaucrat. This has already begun in England; expect it here when the Democrats get the control over your life they have been seeking since FDR.
The government will control your fireplace, and your dryer exhaust, how warm or cool you can keep your home, how large it can be, and how it is insulated – all health issues you understand.
So what how much you weigh, and how much of the health care budget you consume will all be controlled by the federal government. Goodbye state and local government.
What will it really cost (besides $trillions)?
Consider: when the federal government was able to predict the cost of anything? They can’t tell in advance how much it will cost to purchase a toilet seat, a hammer, a jet, a boat – nothing. When they have undertaken to set the expected cost of any piece of legislation, they have been universally wrong – always.
Guess – did they estimate the cost too high, or too low? Silly question. It depends on what they are predicting. If it’s bad news, the estimates are low, if it’s good news, the estimates are always too high. “Unemployment (may rise to 8% from 6% without our Stimulus plan.” Actually it rose from 6% to 10.2% so far with the Stimulus plan. Do you actually think they would lie? A crucial question is: why would any single person in the U.S. believe government estimates about how much health care will cost.
Lyndon Johnson began the War on Poverty trying to convince us he could end the problem. Today in means tested poverty programs including Social Security and Medicare amount to $17,939 per person below the poverty level. This would be $64,756 for a family of four to eliminate poverty. The aggregate money spent on poverty programs since the 1960’s is $15.9 trillion; and we still have the poor with us. Do you believe the government’s estimates of the cost of health care?
It will cost more; it will do less; it will take control of almost every aspect of your individual life. Why would you permit them to do this to you?
Subscribe By Email
- March 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009