Why the proposed healthcare plan will not fix the problems

PPJG Original article.

September 11,2009  4:07 p.m.         microchips_dees
By: Marti Oakley (c) 2009

I actually printed off all 1069 pages of the proposed healthcare reform.  As I did not have the funds available to squander on a speed reader as our congress does so that:

  • I could claim it had been read and save money on paper and ink;
  • Had it read so I could listen to it in fast forward while I visited with my friend across the isle;
  • I could create the impression that I actually did read and understand the bill;
  • I could get a good laugh out of the actual speed which a hired speed reader could rip through this mess without having his/her head implode.

And then realized I had just rendered myself unable to claim “plausible deniability” by claiming I did read the bill and by doing so could not claim at a later date I did not know or understand any part of it.

With these things in mind I did this:

  • Actually spent two days trying to decipher the 460+ changes to US Codes and Statutes,
  • What those USC changes meant.
  • How the change was actually going to impact health access and costs controls.
  • How all this was to be accomplished; and finally try to figure out:
  • How the hell anyone was going to administer this massive mess of doublespeak, backtracking, code changing, strikethrough, insertions, added before, added after, remove this section, insert in this section, and all the other legislative gibberish commonly used to hide the hidden intent of most of what emanates from that body of royal jackasses that exists as our congress.

Here is what I learned about the healthcare proposal as a result of actually READING the damn thing.

It can never fix the healthcare issue for several reasons, the most important of which is that none of the causes of this new crises, that, “We must fix right now! Immediately! We can’t wait a moment longer!”, never once addresses the issues that caused it in the first place.  We are looking at a healthcare proposal that will operate much like the healthcare system:  Just treat the symptoms and never address the underlying cause.  After all, once something is diseased there is little profit to be made from producing a cure or from preventing a re-occurrence.

So, in no particular order (just like the proposal) here is my analysis:

You could reduce the bill to about 200 pages and still have nothing worth voting for.

The bill never addresses the root cause of skyrocketing medical costs:

  • No oversight or enforced regulation of for profit insurance companies resulting in the cause of 60% of bankruptcies in the last year; a higher percentage will result if you add in inflated medical costs and pharmaceuticals.
  • Insurers will still be able to sell policies which they have little intention of honoring for claims made.
  • Funds collected as “premiums” will still be diverted to “wealth building” rather than to payment for services rendered as per contract policy.
  • Policies sold will not be adhesion contracts in which the terms never change, but will allow the insurer to change the contract at will without prior notice.  You’ve gotten those “This service is not covered” letters haven’t you?  You’ll still get them along with the realization that you just went bankrupt.
  • Although the bill states in one provision that those here illegally will not have access to the program…..this is misleading.  It never says that preventing them from continuing to access emergency rooms as a primary care provider and local, state and federal governments having to foot the bill will not continue.  But you aren’t supposed to realize that.
  • It creates a backdoor REAL ID.  Pages 1001-1005 once deciphered and backtracked through codes, agencies and interested corporations with a stake in the outcome, (I stopped counting at 23) for category 2 and category 3 definitions of what “medical devices” means within the context of this bill comes to this:
  • The new Administrator has to come up with some kind of plan that would allow the government to somehow be able to track all of your medical records instantaneously by the devising of some kind of device or system that would identify your personal records, cement your identity as the person requesting treatment, and allow the recording of new information.  Gosh……I wonder what kind of device could do that?  And this new device should be able to hold thousands of pages of other information that might be pertinent to deciding what kind of and how much care you get.

Did I mention the President says he is working with several large insurance companies to “work on this issue”?  Aren’t at least some  of these the big inurance companies we were just forced to bail out?  I will bet you anything you like that in the end, these same companies that threatened to collapse our economy if we weren’t forced into financing their corruption, will not only influence what ends up as healthcare reform,  but some industry insider will be planted  as the new [healthcare czar].  This is pretty much the gist of it all unless of course you want to get into the mandatory vaccines; the “no-chip, no-healthcare” portions and other assorted assaults on your right to decide what your healthcare will consist of.

Oh… let’s not forget the provisions for congress exempting themselves from such a good deal: after all they can vote themselves pay raises while the country flounders in debt and vote themselves golden fleece insurance coverage and juicy retirement funds.

It appears that your construction contractor, car mechanic, electrician, and multiple other service providers must be bonded and insured against mistakes they may make, and by extension pay for the repairs.  But, the medical, pharmaceutical and insurance industry’s can not only make mistakes, but cause irreparable harm or death and having to pay malpractice insurance rates (an estimated 2-3% of the cost of healthcare) is an inconvenience and should be exempted from any liability for those mistakes or, in the instance of pharmaceuticals, actually have a law written to prevent you from holding them responsible for harm or damage from their toxic vaccines.

Got a grievance?  Think you were treated unfairly?  Denied adequate care?  A victim of malpractice?  Don’t even think about filing suit.  Just like the fake food safety bills, the fake healthcare reform bill denies you your right to judicial review.  You must now apply to the new Administrator so he/she can determine if you have a claim and what the remedy would be.

Although I totally support a public option and equal access to healthcare this proposed bill will do nothing but create yet another monster bureaucracy, unmanageable and costly while invading our privacy, and includes that new provision that seems to be popping up in every piece of legislation coming out of the District of Criminals:  the prohibition on accessing the courts of the United States in any event.

Sounds like a deal to me. NOT!

(C) 2009 Marti Oakley

5 Responses

  1. The current debate/quarrel about health care reform ignores a few verities:
    1.The administration wants to cherry pick those parts of our system it likes and graft them onto their creation. Most medical professionals are intelligent, competent, well trained and unafraid of serious scrutiny-all medical staffs in every hospital conduct “M and M”-morbidity and mortality conferences. Our medical infrastructure is impressive and extensive. I would suggest that if you want to reform medicine, take it all, not just the parts you like.

    If, in these leaner times, you want quality people, make the training free-and provide a stipend. People graduate from medical school with an everage debt of $150,000. They service this debt themselves. Do you really expect people to give up their twenties and assume this level of debt with such uncertain prospects? I have directed both of my daughters away from medical school. These are 99th percentile kids-I can prove it-but why would I want them to see
    them struggle for such scant rewards? Nursing school, likewise, should be gratis. Nurses bust their humps and receive little recognition. It is a demanding career. They are usually bright, hard-working, compassionate people. Make it attractive for this type of people. Theories mean nothing if there are no people to put them in practice.

    Put some personal accountability into the equation. People do not value what they get for free. a simple illustration: A Mirena is a popular form of IUD and very effective birth control, boasting efficacy that exceeds 99%. Once placed, they last five years. People who pay for the device themselves usually leave them in for close to the recommended term. Medicaid patients (who get them for nothing in New York) frequently leave them in for the recommended term. Medicaid patients ( who get them for nothing) frequently have them removed in the first three months-a loss of 500 taxpayer dollars. If there were a modest copay and some expectations, I expect you would see a decline in this kind of waste.

    We need tort reform. Trial attorneys cite the need for recourse for the common (wo)man. States like Texas which have placed caps on punitive (not monetary) damages have had dramatic influxes of physicians. If the attorneys are sincere, let ’em prove it. I would suggest that physicians partner with lawyers to improve access for all: let physicians staff volunteer clinics funded, in part, by trial lawyers. Volunteer physicians should enjoy some sort of Good Samaritan immunity for volunteer labor and be able to write the valueof their efforts off in their taxes. Do this and we’ll be there.

    Any system that works will have to be two-tiered. We can’t buy total knees for everybody who wants one. The basic (coach class) option would provide appendectomies, Caesarian Sections and generic meds for all. Those who want elective surgery, brand name pharmaceuticals etc., can have all of the options they want to buy a la carte’.

  2. Marti Oakley may support a “public option”, but it is a violation of the enumerated powers laid out in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution that limits the powers of our U.S. Congress — in other words congress does not have the right or authority to set up any government run insurance — including a public/government run health insurance policy.

    If multi-billionaire George Seros, and millionaires such as Michael Moore and company are so concerned about those who cannot afford health care then why don’t they set-up a private foundation using their bountiful wealth to set up clinics, etc., to help those less fortunate?

    This is what Danny Thomas along with other investors did in building St. Jude’s Hospital.

  3. I agree Mary. the Constitution does not support a public option in the sense you are referring to.

    And, if we were still a Constitution Republic as initially designed and still operating under the common law of the people as specified in that Constitution…….this would never have even become an issue.

    The US government was incorporated in 1871, and operates as corporation……….thats where the USC codes and statutes ……based on the premise that all things are “contract” comes in.

    USC and the UCC are based on the international law of contracts….for corporations.

    The United States, or The United States of America is defined in every legal defintion first as.

    1. a corporation
    2. any agency of the Corportion known as…etc

    This sets the fed up as the trustee of the corporation and each of us as “trusts”…..now you get a birth registration number, and an SS number and death certificate number so the fed can track their “trust” from birth to death.

    This is why everything you sign your name to in relation to the government cosntitutes a contract agreeing to their terms.

    I work constantly to try and educate people about the necessity of returning to the common laws of the Cosntitution with an eye on enforcing the limitations on government……..

    but they would rather argue about who loves god or who doesn’t…..who is more or less moral or patriotic……whether or not Obsama was born here or on the moon……whether or not a woman should be able to control her own body……you know the drill.

    Oh……and for those who think that Roe v. Wade was about abortion…….think again. Don’t even go there. That SCOTUS decision was based on protection of the 4th amendment to your bill of rights and its implications of the right to privacy. That was the decision rendered. The whole thing was presented and argued centered on protecting the people from having this right taken away.


  4. The White House and Congress should be sent a
    copy of this post with respnses.

    After they read this package they will/should kill their
    phoney health bill.

    They need to stay within the limits of our constitution
    and get out of the way of the private sector. The private
    sector can grow JOBS, can bring back our economy,
    can come up with a better health system, can improve
    our education/training systems,…,etc.

    Thanks and Good Luck,
    Frank Henry
    Cottonwood, Arizona

  5. I worry about the Healthcare Plan. Can it cause bad reprocussions to my loved ones budget? Do the pros counterbalance the bad changes?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: