Special Interest Groups Forcing You into Gov Health Care

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by JGL on September 26, 2009 at 5:05pm

Thanks for this urgent update - I sent an email to all Senators you list on this issue....

If they take this out, we still need to be on guard about this issue if ANY part of Obamacare passes!

Why?

The next item on the agenda will be an Amnesty Bill similar to the 2007 McCain one - this will LEGALIZE millions of illegals already here....

So an prohibitions in the Obamacare bill will really be moot - an end run around the will of the people!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Cheryl Bowman on September 26, 2009 at 6:16pm

You know, this just proves what Glenn Beck has been saying on his show that these bills are being written by Special Interest Groups. I, for one, was against McCain-Feingold, but for gosh sakes, something needs to be done about the untoward, heavy-handed influence of these groups. It's an incestuous relationship.

Okay, LaRaza is a large group attempting to influence legislation, but what are we???

I will be taking the recommended action, and thanks for the information.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Cheryl Bowman on October 12, 2009 at 7:32pm

SEIU muscle being exercised in Health Care Reform. Union president has weekly meetings with Obama. Newly uncovered video showing Obama support of control/power via this union.


" target="_blank">

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by JGL on October 13, 2009 at 12:55pm

Looks Like Lincoln is Voting Yes [Mark Hemingway]

Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D., Ark.) just gave a long speech in the Senate Finance Committee about how the Baucus bill will be very good for her constituents. However, Lincoln may be facing a very tough election and was clear that her support of the health care legislation is highly conditional and she may not support future versions of the bill.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Patty Parrett on November 11, 2009 at 2:05pm

AMA votes to continue commitment to health system reform BUT read their NEW position

The AMA voted on 11/9 to adopt this resolution.http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/health-system-reform/ama-continues-...

Read the italicized sections. The AMA is now against a public option. The AMA is now against penalties for privately contracting with doctors. WOW sounds like they are against the main ideas in the Pelosi plan. Look at how many sections pertain to how they get reimbursed in the future. And check out the health exchange section; they don't want the bill to require provider participation - so do you still think you're going to get to keep your doctor after you're forced into the health exchange if the AMA has it's way? Looks like the AMA is protecting themselves NOT their patients.

AMA votes to continue commitment to health system reform
Outlines details to guide efforts toward making the health system better for patients and physicians

For immediate release:
Nov. 9, 2009

HOUSTON – The American Medical Association (AMA) House of Delegates today voted on health system reform policies, reaffirming the AMA’s commitment to health system reform. The AMA's House of Delegates is the nation's broadest, most inclusive assembly of physicians and medical students. Delegates representing every state and medical specialty debate and vote on behalf of their physician peers.

“Now is a defining moment in the history of the AMA,” said AMA President J. James Rohack, M.D. “In a democratic process, the AMA House of Delegates today voted to continue AMA’s commitment to health system reform for patients and physicians. The time to make health system reform a reality is now.”

The AMA reaffirmed its support for health system reform alternatives that are consistent with AMA policies concerning pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of physician practice and universal access for patients. It also outlined specific elements it will actively and publicly support and oppose as the health system debate continues.

The AMA’s support for H.R. 3962 and H.R. 3961 remains in place. “H.R. 3962 is not the perfect bill, and we will continue to advocate for changes that help make the system better for patients and physicians as the legislative process continues,” Dr. Rohack said.

AMA reiterated that health system reform must include Medicare physician payment reform to preserve access to care for seniors, baby boomers and military families. “Ensuring the security and stability of Medicare must serve as the foundation for any serious health system reform this year," Dr. Rohack said. “In less than 60 days, Medicare physician payments are scheduled to be cut by 21 percent, with more cuts in years to come. According to a recent AARP poll, nearly 90 percent of people age 50 and older are concerned that the current Medicare physician payment formula threatens their access to care. We must pass H.R. 3961 as an essential element of health reform and to fulfill Congress’ obligations to current and future Medicare patients.”

Health system reform policy from today’s action is below:

SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION 203: HEALTH SYSTEM REFORM LEGISLATION

RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association is committed to working with Congress, the Administration, and other stakeholders to achieve enactment of health system reforms that include the following seven critical components of AMA policy:

•Health insurance coverage for all Americans;
•Insurance market reforms that expand choice of affordable coverage and eliminate denials for pre-existing conditions or due to arbitrary caps;
•Assurance that health care decisions will remain in the hands of patients and their physicians, not insurance companies or government officials;
•Investments and incentives for quality improvement and prevention and wellness initiatives;
•Repeal of the Medicare physician payment formula that triggers steep cuts and threaten seniors’ access to care;
•Implementation of medical liability reforms to reduce the cost of defensive medicine; and
•Streamline and standardize insurance claims processing requirements to eliminate unnecessary costs and administrative burdens; and be it further
RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association advocate that elimination of denials due to pre-existing conditions is understood to include rescission of insurance coverage for reasons not related to fraudulent representation; and be it further

RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association House of Delegates supports AMA leadership in their unwavering and bold efforts to promote AMA policies for health system reform in the United States; and be it further

RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association support health system reform alternatives that are consistent with AMA policies concerning pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of practice, and universal access for patients; and be it further

RESOLVED, That it is American Medical Association policy that insurance coverage options offered in a health insurance exchange be self-supporting, have uniform solvency requirements; not receive special advantages from government subsidies; include payment rates established through meaningful negotiations and contracts; not require provider participation; and not restrict enrollees’ access to out-of-network physicians; and be it further

RESOLVED, That our AMA actively and publicly support the inclusion in health system reform legislation the right of patients and physicians to privately contract, without penalty to patient or physician; and be it further

RESOLVED, That our AMA actively and publicly oppose the Independent Medicare Commission (or other similar construct), which would take Medicare payment policy out of the hands of Congress and place it under the control of a group of unelected individuals; and be it further

RESOLVED, That our AMA actively and publicly oppose, in accordance with AMA policy, inclusion of the following provisions in health system reform legislation:

•Reduced payments to physicians for failing to report quality data when there is evidence that widespread operational problems still have not been corrected by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services;
•Medicare payment rate cuts mandated by a commission that would create a double-jeopardy situation for physicians who are already subject to an expenditure target and potential payment reductions under the Medicare physician payment system;
•Medicare payments cuts for higher utilization with no operational mechanism to assure that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services can report accurate information that is properly attributed and risk-adjusted;
•Redistributed Medicare payments among providers based on outcomes, quality, and risk-adjustment measurements that are not scientifically valid, verifiable and accurate;
•Medicare payment cuts for all physician services to partially offset bonuses from one specialty to another; and
•Arbitrary restrictions on physicians who refer Medicare patients to high quality facilities in which they have an ownership interest; and be it further
RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association continue to actively engage grassroots physicians and physicians in training in collaboration with the state medical and national specialty societies to contact their Members of Congress, and that the grassroots message communicate our AMA’s position based on AMA policy; and be it further

RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association use the most effective media event or campaign to outline what physicians and patients need from health system reform; and be it further

RESOLVED, That national health system reform must include replacing the sustainable growth rate (SGR) with a Medicare physician payment system that automatically keeps pace with the cost of running a practice and is backed by a fair, stable funding formula, and that the AMA initiate a “call to action” with the Federation to advance this goal; and be it further

RESOLVED, That creation of a new single payer, government-run health care system is not in the best interest of the country and must not be part of national health system reform;</</b>b> and be it further

RESOLVED, That effective medical liability reform that will significantly lower health care costs by reducing defensive medicine and eliminating unnecessary litigation from the system should be part of any national health system reform; and be it further

RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association reaffirm AMA policy H-460.909 Comparative Effectiveness Research.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by JGL on November 12, 2009 at 2:09am

CrappyCare is well, a SCAM for anyone who is young and healthy!

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18667&utm_sour...

Please tell any "Youts" you know who naively voted for "Hopin' and Changin'" that there hard earned money will be taxed (its called a premium still to hide whats going on) excessively to pay for old fat hippies and illegals immagriants health care!

Ask them how they feel to be the newest sucker in the latest Federal Government/Leftist Politician's newest Ponzi scheme!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by JANI on November 13, 2009 at 2:28pm

Sunday, November 8, 2009 10:39 AM
>
> By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
>
>
> As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the '09 elections, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these - and the other endorsements - his package has received are all bought and paid for.
>
> Here are the deals:
>
> * The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians' reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5 percent to 6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill...or else!
>
> The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.
>
> Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP -- which supposedly represents them -- will make more money.
>
> The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.
>
> * Insurance companies got access to 40 million potential new customers. But when the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don't buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and now oppose the bill, albeit for the worst of motives.
>
> The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers. They stood for principle and wouldn't go along with Obama's blackmail. So the Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare.
>
> So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Cheryl Bowman on November 13, 2009 at 7:25pm

Here's a different twist. George Soros (an Atheist) aligning with the Catholic Church and church groups who may become players if/when Health Care is passed.

Leaving no stone unturned, and, as always, follow the money.

http://soldierforliberty.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/george-soros-and-...

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by JANI on November 13, 2009 at 7:49pm

This is worthy of a whole discussion group, Cheryl. Publicly, the Catholic church condemns the abortion funding in the public option. They were behind the Stupak ammendment. So, it appears they are playing both sides? It is very disturbing.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Robert Walsh on December 14, 2009 at 5:02pm

AVAAZ is an Service Employees International Union Operative

AVAAZ is out in full force in Copenhagen today. They also published the article below to give the appearance that there is support is Europe for the leftist view in the U.S. Health Care debate.

Here is an example of their propaganda:

"Live blog sets healthcare record straight"
"Live blogging is the latest vehicle for citizens in Canada and Europe who are hitting back in increasing numbers at "misrepresentation" and "downright lies" about public health systems in their countries in what has become a feverish debate over the future of American healthcare.
Within hours of being set up by global campaign network Avaaz.org, over 75,000 people had visited the website to express their support for public healthcare and to testify that it works, well.
The live blog page is receiving a constant stream of personal stories of life saving, life changing or simply efficient and reliable treatment in a range of public health systems," said Ricken Patel, executive director of Avaaz.org.
http://avaazpress.s3.amazonaws.com/105_PR%20Liveblog%20sets%20healt..."

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MollieB55 on December 15, 2009 at 10:04pm

MORE DIRTY TRICKS FROM THE LEFT SIDE!

A short while ago I got home from shopping and found a message from AARP to call my Senator and demand that he vote to close the “donut hole” so that I could afford my prescriptions! Well, I had cancelled my membership when I learned they were backing Obamacare so I was livid. The message left a number to reach Senator DeMint so I just dialed it instead of looking it up. (I have called him often before). Well, it turns out that you do NOT get to leave a message! You leave your zip code and then push number 1 for one Senator or number 2 for your other Senator. You are given the impression that you are being connected to his/her office. But the second you hit the number the connection cuts off!

I was livid realizing that I had just left a “message” that I wanted my Senator to vote “yes” on the bill! I immediately called his office and explained what had happened and what AARP was doing. Then, after a deal of searching, I got through to AARP. They really wanted me to leave a message on their site but I persisted and finally reached a real person. Let’s just say I was not kind and that I informed them I was going to let every Internet site I belonged to know the dirty tricks they were up to. Please pass the word!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Robert Walsh on December 22, 2009 at 4:50pm

I predict 300 million people will refuse to pay a dime in taxes until this unconstitutional, taxation-without-representation is appealed. Illegal aliens do not come to this country on the hope of being dominated by a dictator. The real reason is freedom. We had it once and we are going to get it back or die!

Predigo 300 millones de personas se negarán a pagar una moneda de diez centavos en impuestos hasta este inconstitucional, los impuestos sin representación son apelados. Los extranjeros ilegales no vienen a este país en la esperanza de ser dominado por un dictador. La razón verdadera es libertad. ¡Nosotros lo tuvimos una vez y nosotros recuperaremos o nos moriremos!

▶ Reply to This