Congress asks CBO if $500 billion in health care savings could equal $1 trillion – fuzzy math

Of course you all remember the 640,329 jobs “created or saved” by the Stimulus Bill passed by Congress last February. I sincerely hope you are still not bogged down with trying to figure out how many of those jobs were created or saved in non-existent congressional districts. Read more

Mayo says no to Medicare at Arizona facility

My guess is Medicare patients overwhelm this operation simply because it is Arizona, home to retirees. It’s also my guess we will see more of this in areas where the over 65 crowd decided to congregate, whether that’s a region that retirees love to move to (Florida) or where young people have just picked up and left for lower tax states, leaving that state with an aging population (Connecticut). Mayo says not now … but …

More than 3,000 patients eligible for Medicare, the government’s largest health-insurance program, will be forced to pay cash if they want to continue seeing their doctors at a Mayo family clinic in Glendale, northwest of Phoenix, said Michael Yardley, a Mayo spokesman. The decision, which Yardley called a two-year pilot project, won’t affect other Mayo facilities in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota.

Remember, your Democrat Congress wants to solve America’s Health Care problem by putting middle class America on Medicare and Medicaid. But just because you are covered doesn’t mean you will get care … unless you also have cash … like Senators …. who are like Revolutionary war heroes.

“Many physicians have said, ‘I simply cannot afford to keep taking care of Medicare patients,’” said Heim, a family doctor who practices in Laurinburg, North Carolina. “If you truly know your business costs and you are losing money, it doesn’t make sense to do more of it.”

And I thought I would include this just for chuckles.

A letter from Congress and the President to Medicare health care recipients

Let me begin by wishing all of you a very Merry Christmas on behalf of President Obama, and your Congress. As you know, through my tireless efforts, we were able to bribe enough senators, enabling the Senate to pass its version of health care reform on Christmas Eve.

Read more

Lieberman says no “flip” on Medicare buy in … now supports Senate Bill

Judge for yourself. The Democrats are making a big deal out of Joe Lieberman’s interview with the Connecticut Post last September (video included) where he purportedly supports a medicare buy in. Lieberman says he was referring to his support of a similar proposal made during the 2004 Presidential campaign. Now he says his position has changed because times have changed, the deficit has grown and the current health care bill makes a “buy in” unnecessary.

Spin? You decide. What’s more enlightening is the story Lieberman tells toward the end of the interview about 1:50 in. Lieberman called the Medicare buy-in unaffordable and was rebuffed by a pro buy-in colleague. Like I have said many times. It’s not about us, it’s about power.

Here’s the original Connecticut Post clip that seems to back up what Joe is saying. You decide.

Bottom line: Joe says he will now support this crummy bill because it no longer contains a public option. But make no mistake, it is still a crummy bill that will:

• add to the deficit
• higher costs for business and high premiums for individuals because of mandates
• and will cut medicare for seniors.
• and this doesn’t even include the likely prospect of rationing of care as promised Doctor reimbursements decline along with the number of Doctors.

These are not scare tactics. These statements all are based on a careful reading of the bill by the people who write this blog. All of these statements, unlike those of the President, are cited and linked. We’ve done the research. All you have to do my lefty friends is read. Feel free to browse.

Where were the rest of the doctors?

The “meeting” on the White House lawn this Monday with President Obama and 150 doctors, (who, at the time, looked much like potted plants, if I do say so myself), would lead one to believe that doctors support Obamacare. Perhaps those 150 doctors do, but many of the rest were elsewhere.

They were lobbying against a key provision of the Baucus Unaffordable Health Care Bill that will “save money”, but cost many seniors needed health care in the process.  Yes, AARP should have been lobbying against this provision, but, apparently, they don’t care.

To reduce the costs of Medicare, Senator Baucus (D. Mt.) has come up with this nifty idea.

Medicare would rank doctors against their peers based on how much they cost the program—and then automatically cut all payments by 5% to [any doctor] who falls into the 90th percentile or above.

Here is how this insanity would work.

Let’s say Doctor “A” has many patients who are very sick, and Doctor” B”, and eight of his colleagues have many patients who are healthy.  In order for Doctor “A” to treat his sick patients, he or she will have to order a great deal of medical care to treat them, thus costing Medicare money.  Dr. “B”, and his eight colleagues, on the other hand will not cost Medicare very much money because their patients just happen to be healthy.

At the end of the year, Dr. “A” will see his Medicare payments reduced by 5%, but Dr. “B” and his eight collegues will see no reduction in their Medicare payments.

What happens the following year?

Dr. “A” decides to “downsize” his practice giving his sickest patients a “pink slip”.  I wonder where those patients will go?  I guess Sen. Baucus doesn’t care.

Dr. “B” and his eight colleagues, after seeing what happened to Dr. “A”, begin to cut back on the treatment they give to their patients, lest they become the doctor whose reimbursements are cut for that year.  And, this cycle continues.  As the Wall Street Journal points out, this is like a game of musical chairs.  There will always only be nine chairs and, there will always be ten doctors.  Someone always must lose.

Here, the loser is any senior on Medicare.

Ironic, isn’t it, that the Democrats are so concerned about the bogus “45,000 deaths per year ” because of the lack of insurance, and, they don’t give a wit about the real folks who have insurance…with Medicare?

The Baucus gag order:Update below video

Recently Humana, a Kentucky insurance company that offers  Medicare Advantage plans, sent a letter to all of the seniors enrolled in its plans.  Although some say the form of the letter may have been an issue, it is the substance of the letter that drew outrage from Senator Baucus (D-Mont.), the author of the Baucus Unaffordable Health Care Bill.

The letter advised seniors that because of spending cuts to Medicare contained within the bill,

millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable.

As a result of the Senator’s ire, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) sent Humana a cease and desist order claiming that the mailing was “misleading and confusing”.

Just in case the cease and desist order against Humana doesn’t do the trick, the CMS (no doubt at Senator Baucus’ urging) has also banned any provider of Medicare Advantage plans from providing similar information to their insureds.

Here is what Senator Baucus had to say,

It is wholly inappropriate for insurance companies to mislead seniors regarding any subject—particularly on a subject as important to them, and to the nation, as health-care reform…[t]he health-care reform bill we released last week strengthens Medicare and does not cut benefits covered under the Medicare program—and seniors need to know that.

I can only assume that Senator Baucus hasn’t read his own bill as it clearly makes major cuts to Medicare Advantage Plans.  Or, he hasn’t listened to the Congressional Budget Office which places the cuts to Medicare Advantage at $100 billion over 10 years.  Or, he hasn’t listened to any of the well over 100 speeches given by the President, which also describe the cuts to Medicare Advantage.

And, here is what Senator McConnell (R. Ky.) had to say in response, but Hot Air has the full speech on video.

Update:  And who at CMS decided the Humana letter was false and misleading?  Jonathan Blum…a former senior aide to Senator Baucus, and a health advisor on the Obama transition team!

Although, the President has called for a civil discourse about Obamacare, it would seem to be difficult to have that discourse with a gag in your mouth.

Obama’s Health Rationer-in-Chief

It is worth some time learning about the man who will be playing a pivotal role in Obamacare (should it come to pass), and who is already playing a pivotal role in Obama’s version of Medicare.

He is Dr. Ezikiel Emanuel, and, if the name sounds familiar, he is the brother of Rahm Emanuel, the White House Chief of Staff.  So far, Dr. Emanuel has  been appointed by the President to two very important positions…health policy advisor to the Office of Management and Budget, and, a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.

What does Dr. Emanuel think of Obama’s statement that we will  cover some of the costs of Obamacare by cutting waste, etc.?

Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of care are merely ‘lipstick’ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change.

So, how would Dr. Emanuel control costs?

To him, the issue is the Hippocratic Oath.  Here is what he says about that,

“Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness,” he writes. “This culture is further reinforced by a unique understanding of professional obligations, specifically the Hippocratic Oath’s admonition to ‘use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment’ as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others.”

Although most would find that approach to the practice of medicine laudable, in Dr. Emanuel’s mind, adhering to the Hippocratic Oath is a problem because it does not “control costs”.   His solution…change the Hippocratic Oath.  Medical students should be trained,

to provide socially sustainable, cost-effective care. [emphasis supplied]

Exactly what is socially sustainable, cost effective care?  According to Dr. Emanuel, it is,

adding the communitarian perspective to ensure that medical resources will be allocated in a way that keeps society going: “Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity—those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations—are to be socially guaranteed as basic. [emphasis supplied]

Thus, according to Dr. Emanuel, health care is a basic right if you fit the above description.  Conversely, it is not a basic right if you fit the following description:

Covering services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic, and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia. [emphasis supplied]

And who decides whether someone is “prevented” from becoming a participating citizen?  Given his leadership role in Obamacare, I suppose Dr. Emanuel gets to make that decision.

I wonder what medical care he would have given to Helen Keller had he been her family’s doctor?

One further insight into Dr. Emanuel’s thinking…

“Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda,” he wrote last Nov. 16 in the Health Care Watch Blog. “If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration’s health-reform effort.”

Hum…could there be a connection between the union support for Obamacare, and the auto bailout?

Democrats admit Medicare cuts part of Obama-Kennedy health care plan

From Gateway Pundit, we’ve got video from a Colorado town hall meeting where Rep. Betsy Marky (D-Colo.) flat out states Medicare recipients will have to give up benefits for Obama-Kennedycare to work. Who are you going to believe?

Read more

Medicare, the reason for Obamacare

Jim has been talking for months about the tie between Medicare and Obamacare.  Medicare is broke, and to keep it running, the government needs an enormous infusion of cash.  Finally, someone has admitted that Jim is correct.

Alan Greenspan has now spoken about the connection.

And, let me explain why.

When Medicare came into being under President Johnson, there were millions of “baby boomers” in the work force, and, they paid a payroll tax to offset the cost of Medicare.  And, that continued for decades.  Medicare worked, and all was well.

Now, as the say, “Houston, we have a problem”.  The millions of “baby boomers” who paid for the system are now retiring themselves, and this creates a double “wammy”.

First, the “baby boomers” are now reaching the age of 65, and they have no where else to turn for medical insurance except Medicare.  That program long ago wiped out any private insurance for seniors.  So when you hear Obama say that his public option will “compete” with private insurance, remember what happened when Medicare came into being…private insurance for seniors quickly died.

And, second, those retiring “baby boomers” will no longer be paying payroll taxes into the system.  The net effect of this is that hundreds of thousands of retirees will be added to Medicare each year, and the tax base to pay for the system will be eroding.

Without Obamacare, and, a public “option”, Medicare will fall further and further into a sea of red ink.  To halt this trend, Obamacare ultimately will force the young and healthy to buy the public “option” insurance, and the premiums they pay will be used to prop up the ailing Medicare system.  But, it will not, and cannot stop there.

Obama and Congress tell us that they can pay for Obamacare by saving $500 billion over 10 years from Medicare.  Logic tells us that adding millions of “baby boomers” to the Medicare rolls, eliminating the payroll taxes they pay into the system, and, simultaneously wringing billions out of Medicare can never happen.  Unless, of course, health care for seniors is rationed.

And, that is a preview of what Obamacare will look like in the future.  The system can only be sustained if medical care is rationed, not just for seniors, but for all.

Update (Jim): The Sound Off Sister and I listened to this further affirmation last night on Special Report from Charles Krauthammer. The Feds need to save Medicare and they are going to do it with your kids money and by stealing the insurance companies premiums.

Is AARP selling its members down the river?

For months, President Obama has been promoting his health care plan, and proposing to pay for it by, among other things, squeezing billions of dollars out of Medicare.  And AARP, looking more and more like an arm of the DNC than an advocate for its members, has been backing the president’s plan.

So this week, the president held yet another in a seemingly endless series of town hall meetings to promote his plan, but, this time the meeting was with AARP.  I suppose it should have come as no surprise to the president that seniors, given all they have heard, would be concerned about things like rationing, reduced benefits, and “end of life” counseling.  The surprise though to many AARP members is that AARP doesn’t seem to share those concerns.

I’ve linked to an article, not necessarily because it is “the truth, the whole truth, and, nothing but the truth”, but because of the comments section below the article.  It is not only me that is questioning AARP’s motives, but AARP members as well.

But, back to the AARP town hall meeting, and the president’s attempt to allay seniors’  fears.

Mr. Obama said the Medicare cuts will be targeted at wasteful spending, such as overpayments to insurance companies that participate in private Medicare plans, as well as unnecessary hospital readmissions.

Were I on Medicare, and, at that town hall meeting, I wouldn’t find that statement particularly comforting.  I would have raised my hand to ask, “Why can’t you do that now, Mr. President?  Does it take an act of Congress for our government to stop wasteful spending?”  In response, the President would probably have spoken about red pills and blue pills, and unnecessary removal of tonsils, but I’m  fairly confident that I wouldn’t have gotten an answer.

The answer, to me,  is simple, Mr. President.  You can’t cut $250 to $500 billion in Medicare spending over 10 years when you are simultaneously adding millions of “baby boomers” to the Medicare rolls, without reducing payments to health care providers.  Reduced payments means fewer and fewer health care providers will accept Medicare.  And, fewer and fewer health care providers means longer and longer wait times to see a doctor.

Mr. President, is it too much to ask that you be honest with the American public?  And, AARP, is it too much to ask that you be honest with your members?