Here is an overview of the ObamaCare health care bill (HR 3200) which Congress is about to force every citizen to live under, except members of Congress.
Members of Congress will be exempt from being forced into this plan. They will have their own. The liberals, Democrats and some Republicans - while forcing you to join the plan - refuse to include themselves. Members of Congress will have a better plan which gives them freedom you will be denied.
You can read an updated and revised overview of HR 3200 compiled by Liberty Counsel.
Or, go to the full text of HR 3200 and read directly from the government website what this bill does!
Your Senators and Representative will soon be home for the August recess of Congress. Get a car load of friends and go meet with your Senators and Representative. Find out where he or she is holding Townhall meetings. Go to those meetings and ask for some answers! Some of them may try to avoid discussing ObamaCare. Don't let them!
Friday, July 31, 2009
Saturday, July 25, 2009
MUST SEE ARTICLE - More on Healthcare
This was forwarded to me today and is written by a woman who has read the entire Health Care bill that Obama is proposing and that Congress will vote on: We must stop this from becoming America's new health care system before it's too late.
DEADLY DOCTORS
O ADVISERS WANT TO RATION CARE
Read Comments Leave a Comment By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
Emanuel: Believes in withholding care from elderly for greater good.
THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the de cisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They'd decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.
Yet at least two of President Obama's top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.
Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.
Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change," he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).
Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, "as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others" (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).
Yes, that's what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.
Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they'll tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.
Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).
Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.
He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years" (Lancet, Jan. 31).
I have just received an email from a friend who heard an interview on the Fred Thompson Show (7/16/09) from a Patient Rights Advocate, Betsy McCaughey. When I checked it out (and you can hear it, yourself), it chilled me to the bone.
You Must get into it and hear what she has to say!! She has read all 1400 pages of the bill and points out many things that you will be shocked at, including whether or not, at our age, there's any point of having any medical care for certain conditions to help us live longer. You will not believe what she has to say!
Listen to this:
Listen to the Betsy McCaughey Interview. Unbelievable!!!!
We must get the word out, because surely Obama and his administration don't want us to know what is really going on, and they can ramrod this one through Congress just like they did the stimulus pkg.
DEADLY DOCTORS
O ADVISERS WANT TO RATION CARE
Read Comments Leave a Comment By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
Emanuel: Believes in withholding care from elderly for greater good.
THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the de cisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They'd decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.
Yet at least two of President Obama's top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.
Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.
Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change," he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).
Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, "as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others" (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).
Yes, that's what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.
Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they'll tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.
Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).
Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.
He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years" (Lancet, Jan. 31).
I have just received an email from a friend who heard an interview on the Fred Thompson Show (7/16/09) from a Patient Rights Advocate, Betsy McCaughey. When I checked it out (and you can hear it, yourself), it chilled me to the bone.
You Must get into it and hear what she has to say!! She has read all 1400 pages of the bill and points out many things that you will be shocked at, including whether or not, at our age, there's any point of having any medical care for certain conditions to help us live longer. You will not believe what she has to say!
Listen to this:
Listen to the Betsy McCaughey Interview. Unbelievable!!!!
We must get the word out, because surely Obama and his administration don't want us to know what is really going on, and they can ramrod this one through Congress just like they did the stimulus pkg.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Who do YOU want in charge of your healthcare?
As you may or may not know, the current administration is doing a full court press to pass the government run health care bill before the August break. I am hopeful that the outcry from Americans will be enough to stop ObamaCare from happening, but the state of Minnesota has its own battle to fight on the health care front.
There was a push in the Minnesota House last session to have our own version of Obama Care. In one of the Health committee meetings I attended, Minnesota Single Payer/Universal Health Care was discussed. I was surprised to hear that the only argument for government run health care was simply that "people have a right to health care".
I listened with interest to the gentleman proposing this single payer idea and how he spoke of the "15 member board" that would rule on who could have what procedure or care. Does anything seem more socially unjust than 15 government appointed "bureaucrats" who have the authority to decide on the healthcare needs of Minnesota's 5 million citizens, saying yeah or nay to such things as a knee replacement, or chemotherapy, or breast reconstruction after mastectomy? And as if that weren't enough, this newly packaged version of "Hillary Care" that some Democrats are pushing for, will also grant us such gifts as:
l. loss of the freedom to choose your own health care plan.
2. loss of personal choice about what care to receive, whether or not to receive it, and when to receive it.
3. further tax increases on Minnesota businesses to pay for this plan, which is sure to run even more businesses to neighboring states.
One very concerning proposal in the 2008 session was in the language reading that "residents" would be covered. It takes a mere 30 days for a person to become a resident of Minnesota. In no time at all, Minnesota would soon become the Health Care Mecca of the United States, which would most certainly mean a further plunge into negative numbers for Minnesota's already fragile budget situation.
There are some great proposals on the table by Republicans to start fixing the health care crisis, should the majority give them the opportunity to speak.
The first thing to do is to start reducing unnecessary mandates that drive up the premiums, such as mandatory pregnancy coverage, drug treatment, mental health services, chiropractic, social workers and massage therapists. In all,the state of Minnesota has 64 health care mandates. A 21 year old singe male who doesn't need pregnancy coverage is forced to pay for it because of these mandates. We need a cafeteria style system that encourages competition.
We need greater transparency in healthcare costs and quality of medical services so we know what we are paying for and can make the best possible choices.
We need market-driven, common sense solutions that put patients back in control of healthcare decisions. INDIVIDUALS should have the ability to choose their doctor, not INSURANCE companies.
Education would also go a very long way in putting a limit on our country's rising healthcare costs. So many of America's most prevalent diseases are caused simply by a poor diet and lack of activity. Citizens need to be educated and encouraged to take charge of their own health, which would easily cut millions from our country's healthcare costs.
One of my top goals as District 56A's State Representative would be to work tirelessly to maintain individual freedom regarding health care. Government takeover is not the answer to America's rising healthcare costs. If such a legislation does pass, in Minnesota or America, we will be forfeiting the best healthcare in the world and replacing it with healthcare tragedies of unimaginable proportions.
There was a push in the Minnesota House last session to have our own version of Obama Care. In one of the Health committee meetings I attended, Minnesota Single Payer/Universal Health Care was discussed. I was surprised to hear that the only argument for government run health care was simply that "people have a right to health care".
I listened with interest to the gentleman proposing this single payer idea and how he spoke of the "15 member board" that would rule on who could have what procedure or care. Does anything seem more socially unjust than 15 government appointed "bureaucrats" who have the authority to decide on the healthcare needs of Minnesota's 5 million citizens, saying yeah or nay to such things as a knee replacement, or chemotherapy, or breast reconstruction after mastectomy? And as if that weren't enough, this newly packaged version of "Hillary Care" that some Democrats are pushing for, will also grant us such gifts as:
l. loss of the freedom to choose your own health care plan.
2. loss of personal choice about what care to receive, whether or not to receive it, and when to receive it.
3. further tax increases on Minnesota businesses to pay for this plan, which is sure to run even more businesses to neighboring states.
One very concerning proposal in the 2008 session was in the language reading that "residents" would be covered. It takes a mere 30 days for a person to become a resident of Minnesota. In no time at all, Minnesota would soon become the Health Care Mecca of the United States, which would most certainly mean a further plunge into negative numbers for Minnesota's already fragile budget situation.
There are some great proposals on the table by Republicans to start fixing the health care crisis, should the majority give them the opportunity to speak.
The first thing to do is to start reducing unnecessary mandates that drive up the premiums, such as mandatory pregnancy coverage, drug treatment, mental health services, chiropractic, social workers and massage therapists. In all,the state of Minnesota has 64 health care mandates. A 21 year old singe male who doesn't need pregnancy coverage is forced to pay for it because of these mandates. We need a cafeteria style system that encourages competition.
We need greater transparency in healthcare costs and quality of medical services so we know what we are paying for and can make the best possible choices.
We need market-driven, common sense solutions that put patients back in control of healthcare decisions. INDIVIDUALS should have the ability to choose their doctor, not INSURANCE companies.
Education would also go a very long way in putting a limit on our country's rising healthcare costs. So many of America's most prevalent diseases are caused simply by a poor diet and lack of activity. Citizens need to be educated and encouraged to take charge of their own health, which would easily cut millions from our country's healthcare costs.
One of my top goals as District 56A's State Representative would be to work tirelessly to maintain individual freedom regarding health care. Government takeover is not the answer to America's rising healthcare costs. If such a legislation does pass, in Minnesota or America, we will be forfeiting the best healthcare in the world and replacing it with healthcare tragedies of unimaginable proportions.
Friday, July 10, 2009
......Does your DNA belong to you, or to the government? The answer may surprise you
This week I had the privilege of attending a picnic with Twila Brase, president and founder of Citizens Council on Health Care. The picnic was to celebrate the "victory" regarding "Baby DNA", or as some refer to it, Newborn Screening or Genetic Privacy.
The main issue is this: Who owns the individual DNA of a newborn? Let me explain. When a baby is born in Minnesota, there is blood sample taken from the heal and tested for 54 possible genetic defects....the most common and oldest one screened for is PKU - Phenalketonuria. If caught early, many of these potential maladies could be corrected and mental retardation can be prevented. This is a good test, a very helpful test in doing what we can to make sure Minnesota's newborns are healthy. The testing of the blood for this is not an issue for anyone.
What happens after the test is completed? Now that is a problem. The Minnesota Department of Health decides to keep and store this genetic material and warehouse it. It is then used for research by facilities like the U of M and Mayo Clinic. Minnesota law states that this material can only be held and used with permission, yet, absolutely no knowledge or consent is asked for or provided to parents of Minnesota newborns. At a senate hearing I was at, Senator David Hann (R-Dist 42) pointedly asked the two top officials from the Minnesota Department of Health about this subject. His question was "Out of the thousands of samples you are now holding, exactly how many do you have permission for?" The answer was shocking: ZERO. Our very own Minnesota Department of Health is breaking the LAW!
There was debate and discussion for quite some time on this, but the one comment that sticks in my memory was when Senator Paul Koering(R-Dist 12) asked, "How long exactly have they been doing this, and they don't have MY DNA do they?" There was, of course, no answer to this question from the Department of Health.
The DFL Majority in the House, with Rep Paul Thissen(DFL-Dist. 63A), introduced a bill, HF 1341, which proposed complete elimination of informed written consent requirements for the taking, storage and use of newborn blood and DNA. This bill would repeal the genetic privacy law for everyone born today, everyone born in the last 23 years, and everyone born in the future. This is yet one more example of your LIBERTIES being taken and yet the citizens of Minnesota are conveniently left out of the loop, completely unaware that their rights are being violated in this way.
The bill received much opposition from citizens and parents and although it was listed on the House calendar for three days, Rep. Thissen never brought it forward. The picnic this week was to celebrate this victory, and as was stated by three legislators who spoke there, it was the "citizens" with signs and stickers in opposition at the committee hearings that affected this bill being brought forward.
Rep. Thissen's dropping of this legislation is proof positive that you can indeed make a difference in Minnesota's laws and government, so don't ever underestimate your power to persuade when you show up and get involved.
Ms Brase and others believe there is a strong possibility that this bill will be brought up again in the 2010 session. Keep the pressure on your legislators to vote against this attempt once again to take away our liberties. I would whole-heartedly agree with Twila when she said,""There is nothing more personal, more private, more yours than your DNA and your unique genetic code. The law requires express informed written parental consent for the storage and use of newborn DNA, yet the Minnesota Department of Health refuses to follow the law. The rights of the 73,000 babies born each year in Minnesota are being violated." "This legislation should be dropped. The health department's attempt to repeal constitutional privacy rights and informed parent consent should be ended. Repealing genetic privacy rights at birth, and eliminating parent consent requirements for government storage, use and analysis of newborn DNA, would mean the end of genetic privacy rights for all future generations."
For more information about CCHC go to: http://www.cchconline.org/ There is an on-line petition that you can sign telling Governor Pawlenty that you oppose any change in the current law.
The main issue is this: Who owns the individual DNA of a newborn? Let me explain. When a baby is born in Minnesota, there is blood sample taken from the heal and tested for 54 possible genetic defects....the most common and oldest one screened for is PKU - Phenalketonuria. If caught early, many of these potential maladies could be corrected and mental retardation can be prevented. This is a good test, a very helpful test in doing what we can to make sure Minnesota's newborns are healthy. The testing of the blood for this is not an issue for anyone.
What happens after the test is completed? Now that is a problem. The Minnesota Department of Health decides to keep and store this genetic material and warehouse it. It is then used for research by facilities like the U of M and Mayo Clinic. Minnesota law states that this material can only be held and used with permission, yet, absolutely no knowledge or consent is asked for or provided to parents of Minnesota newborns. At a senate hearing I was at, Senator David Hann (R-Dist 42) pointedly asked the two top officials from the Minnesota Department of Health about this subject. His question was "Out of the thousands of samples you are now holding, exactly how many do you have permission for?" The answer was shocking: ZERO. Our very own Minnesota Department of Health is breaking the LAW!
There was debate and discussion for quite some time on this, but the one comment that sticks in my memory was when Senator Paul Koering(R-Dist 12) asked, "How long exactly have they been doing this, and they don't have MY DNA do they?" There was, of course, no answer to this question from the Department of Health.
The DFL Majority in the House, with Rep Paul Thissen(DFL-Dist. 63A), introduced a bill, HF 1341, which proposed complete elimination of informed written consent requirements for the taking, storage and use of newborn blood and DNA. This bill would repeal the genetic privacy law for everyone born today, everyone born in the last 23 years, and everyone born in the future. This is yet one more example of your LIBERTIES being taken and yet the citizens of Minnesota are conveniently left out of the loop, completely unaware that their rights are being violated in this way.
The bill received much opposition from citizens and parents and although it was listed on the House calendar for three days, Rep. Thissen never brought it forward. The picnic this week was to celebrate this victory, and as was stated by three legislators who spoke there, it was the "citizens" with signs and stickers in opposition at the committee hearings that affected this bill being brought forward.
Rep. Thissen's dropping of this legislation is proof positive that you can indeed make a difference in Minnesota's laws and government, so don't ever underestimate your power to persuade when you show up and get involved.
Ms Brase and others believe there is a strong possibility that this bill will be brought up again in the 2010 session. Keep the pressure on your legislators to vote against this attempt once again to take away our liberties. I would whole-heartedly agree with Twila when she said,""There is nothing more personal, more private, more yours than your DNA and your unique genetic code. The law requires express informed written parental consent for the storage and use of newborn DNA, yet the Minnesota Department of Health refuses to follow the law. The rights of the 73,000 babies born each year in Minnesota are being violated." "This legislation should be dropped. The health department's attempt to repeal constitutional privacy rights and informed parent consent should be ended. Repealing genetic privacy rights at birth, and eliminating parent consent requirements for government storage, use and analysis of newborn DNA, would mean the end of genetic privacy rights for all future generations."
For more information about CCHC go to: http://www.cchconline.org/ There is an on-line petition that you can sign telling Governor Pawlenty that you oppose any change in the current law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
