MySpace


D. Beirne

David Beirne


Last Updated: 11/21/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Male
Status: Married
Age: 47
Sign: Libra

City: CORPUS CHRISTI
State: Texas
Country: US
Signup Date: 9/9/2007
Thursday, July 23, 2009 
....................

Last night, picked up some of  President Obama’s speech on health care bill he wants to bless us with. The following statement jumped out at me:

"It will keep government out of health care decisions, giving you the option to keep your insurance if you're happy with it." 

Well, that sounds swell except the fact checker points out: “In House legislation, a commission appointed by the government would determine what is and isn't covered by insurance plans offered in a new purchasing pool, including a plan sponsored by the government. The bill also holds out the possibility that, over time, those standards could be imposed on all private insurance plans, not just the ones in the pool.”

This commission appointed by the government—how is it different than a faceless insurance board deciding? How will politics be kept out of who gets to be on the commission and who will determine the criteria for their decisions? Can I be on it? Will it be doctors, health care specialist, insurance gurus, or Barbara Boxer’s niece’s unemployed boyfriend? I have a feeling that this won’t be a good thing for us.  Chuck Colson  has an article on Christianitytoday.com citing an example of why I have severe doubts about this commission:

A mentally retarded Georgia teenager suffering from cerebral palsy had been receiving 94 hours of in-home nursing care from Medicaid per week, until the state decided to reduce it to 84. The patient's doctor protested. Her mother sued. Then, in Moore v. Medows, arguing before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the government attorney argued that the state is the "final arbiter" of medical decisions. While the court tried to find middle ground, it affirmed the government's position, stating, "A private physician's word on medical necessity is not dispositive." 

Read that again: “…it affirmed the government’s position, stating, ‘A private physician’s word on medical necessity is not dispositive.’” A doctor’s word is not the final word. The state's word is final and definitive, settling the matter. Medical opinion doesn’t settle the matter. The state’s opinion does. Huh?? Is this a precursor to the gov’t.  having the final word on everything?

I think I’d rather they just nationalized the health care industry, make all m.d.’s, r.n.’s, pharmacies, etc. into civil servants and pay them a flat salary like the rest of us poor slugs.  Oh wait==they are nationalizing health care, aren’t they? One would think with all the profits the gov’t will be making off it’s banks, GM sales, and hospitals we should have that federal deficit knocked out in no time.