Letter from Edward Lynch, candidate for Congress from FL.
Dear Friend,
As you know, President Obama has been pushing his “Universal healthcare” plan. There have been a lot of people saying many different things about this new healthcare plan. Therefore, I felt the need to do what our congressmen and women have not done and read all of the healthcare plans out there. Let me tell you, as you can imagine, it was not easy reading. I wanted to be able to give you the ammunition (facts) to reply to those that want to know why we oppose the plan.
First, let me state that I do believe that we need to make sure that every LEGAL American citizen has access to the best healthcare system in the world and that it is affordable for everyone. Let me also state that, after reading the bills that are being considered, if the healthcare plan was a good plan, I would let you know that. That being said, the proposals set forth in the house (H.R. 3200)and in the senate are very bad for America for the following reasons:
1. We simply can not afford it. The Congressional Budget Office states that even with higher taxes on high income earners and penalties on employers who don’t provide coverage, the plan will fall $239 billion short of covering its cost of over $1 trillion. That is their best case scenario without the bill being completely scored.
2. It will not cover everyone. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that over 17 million people would remain uninsured AFTER this plan is implemented.
3. You will not be able to shop for or obtain private insurance if you do not have private insurance prior to the bill being passed. This is somewhat clearly stated on pgs. 16 and 17 in section 102(a)(1)(A).
4. After a 5 year grace period, all private insurers that are still in business will be required to offer a “qualified health benefits” plan based on government standards. The problem is whether or not the “government standards” will exclude private insurers. This on page 17, section 102(b)(1)(A).
5. No new policies will be allowed to be written by a private insurer after the public option becomes law. Also page 17.
6. Every five years, the elderly will have to attend a mandatory “advanced care planning consultation” for an “explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end of life services.” The consultation will be conducted more frequently if a significant change in health condition; including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life limiting disease, terminal diagnosis, life threatening injury or upon admission to a skilled nursing or long term care facility. In other words, if you are old, you will be consulted about what your options will be if you get sick, if healthcare would not be an option (see #7). This starts on page 425.
7. Page 501 of the bill starts a section that indicates that $1 billion will be spent on “comparative effectiveness research” which is how the government evaluates relative merits of various treatments. In other words, rationing. This is tantamount to the government determining whether or not you are worth getting a particular treatment depending on your prognosis or age. Sec. 1401 Part D
8. This plan would allow for government funded abortions. Since this bill would cover all procedures, abortion is included. There is no exception for abortion.
9. Members of congress and unions would be exempt from this plan and not have to be a part of the healthcare plan. Recently, John Fleming, introduced H.R. 615 that stated that members that vote in favor of a government run healthcare must enroll under the public option. No democrat would sign on. If it is not good enough for congress, it is not good enough for us! This is section 3116.
10. $500 billion will be cut from senior healthcare to help pay for this bill. This will weaken Medicare, an organization already in trouble due to insufficient funds.
11. Hospitals and private healthcare facilities will not be able to collect money from the government plan unless they are “public” facilities.
12. Businesses will be fined over 8% of an employee’s salary if they do not provide healthcare insurance for their employees. Sec. 313.
13. Individuals that do not have health insurance will be fined an amount that will encourage them to purchase the government plan. Sec 401 Part VIII Subpart A Sec. 59B.
14. All “people,” legal or not, will be covered under this plan and identification cards will be issued. These identification cards will not be based on social security numbers.
These are some of the proven reasons why I could never support a bill like this. These are irrefutable facts, things that our present government does not want our citizens to be aware of, which is why they are trying to pass this bill as quickly as possible. The more we find out about the bill, the worse it gets. As I stated above, we need to reform our healthcare system, but this is not the way. In this case, doing nothing is better than passing this bill. It will hurt seniors, businesses and families.
Saturday, August 01, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Murray sez:
You know, Obamamites keep telling us there are 47 million people without insurance but they never identify who they are. Could it be this number consists basically of illegals and young people who wouldn't buy health insurance at any cost? Since our government allows the illegals to keep coming in by the thousands means this number will continue to grow. Gee, I wonder why they never reveal how many people want their healthcare to remain the same?
A lot of this is simply untrue. I suggest you either re-read it, because you missed so much the first time, or may I suggest visiting this site: http://www.healthcarereformmyths.org/HealthcareReformMyths.php?Act=Home#A17
A couple of points in particular:
1) There is no mandatory counseling every 5 years. If you WANT to discuss a living will with your physician, this will now be paid for. It is not now, under medicare.
2) 14. All “people,” legal or not, will be covered under this plan and identification cards will be issued. These identification cards will not be based on social security numbers. Is completely false. In the bill the exact quote says:
"Sec. 246. no federal payment for undocumented aliens.
Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
The identification card part reads:
Sec. 1173a. ...talks about standardizing electronic administrative transactions.
‘(D) enable the real-time (or near real-time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card;"
So I don't think you actually read the bill. I think this is a cut and paste from another website. No offense but I don't want you to appear uninformed.
I was about to also state that re-reading the bill is in order. I "looked over" the bill initially and am now almost done going over it closely. What Norma states is extremely misleading!!!!!!
I will simply say that "Damsel" pretty much covered the facts I was going to list....so I'll just repeat that a closer reading by Norma is called for.
Don't take anyone's comments as gospel....Norma, your email is associated with an educational facility....make it proud....READ the bill yourself.
I'm not concerned for myself. I have a good insurance plan that I will be keeping and have already made a living will so that Palin's "death panel" won't have a chance to kill me.
I'm an educator and always stress researching things for yourself. Do so!
Interesting that if Obama supporters read 3200 their interpretation is right, and the rest of us wrong. And always, always the personal slam.
"Don't take anyone's comments as gospel....Norma, your email is associated with an educational facility....make it proud....READ the bill yourself." So you have read it and understood all the gov't jargon and implications, but I haven't. You can read your party's interpretation, but i can't. Don't forget my other "educational facility," the one where I translated communist medical newspapers from Russian into English.
Very Very well put. I am 18 and i have read over 600 pages so far. It is a tough read, but the fact that this thing is written where it even leaves these ridiculous sections open to debate means that it will probably happen. Its just the way history works. I dont know everything im young still, but any knowledge of history and you will understand this.
I think the most scary thing is that it makes it ILLEGAL to do the one thing that should really be done to fix healthcare. That is, covering the catastrophic and paying yourself for regular checkups etc...
Norma, can you or someone else please validate point 9 regarding the exemption of Congress and others? I have searched the bill via the Library of Congress (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:) and cannot find a section 3116.
Exemption of Congress is one claim I hear a lot and would like to see the verbiage myself.
Thank you for your time.
Here's their current plan, superior to Medicare and/or any private plan. http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/
Do you think they are giving this up? Do you know any socialist country where the gov't bureaucrats have to wait in line or use the state-run hospitals?
Since the federal plan (current) depends on choices from private companies, they could just lose what they have if Obamacare wins.
Norma;
While I appreciate your pointing out the plan that Congress currently has, that is beside the point I made with my post of 8/13 @ 11:20. Point 9 of the letter from Ed Lynch cites section 3116 as the source for his claim that "Members of congress and unions would be exempt from this plan". HR3200 does not have a section 3116. Please identify the portion of HR 3200 that does support his claim. Otherwise, he's wrong.
Thank you, again, for your time.
Richard
Addendum to my post of 8/14 @ 9:44 AM.
The closest reference to exemption by Congress and unions I have is found in a Senate version of a bill. Via a Don Surber post (http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2009/08/13/not-a-good-day-for-robert-gibbs/), the commenter RM3 Frisker FTN provides the details.
That being said, I suggest that critics of HR 3200 stop saying that it exempts Congress until they can cite the section of the HR bill that contains this language. Using the non-existent section 3116 as proof only damages your credibility.
Richard
Richard, there seems to be more than one version, and changes are being made--I heard Dingell refer to one. However, the "federal" health insurance that we taxpayers pay for in the tune of billions (LA times had figures) is private insurance with many choices. If Obama succeeds in destroying private health plans, I suppose then the rest of the federal employees will be forced on to a public plan. However, that said, you're just nibbling around the edges. We pay for them either way.
Oh, and Richard, please contact Ed with your specific questions about his letter.
Members of Congress are exempt from H.R. 3200 because the Bill covers Employment-Based Health Plans [as defined in Section 100(c)(6)] and elected officials are not employees. Similarly, a union plan covers union members, who also are not employees. Therefore, such plans are outside this legislation.
Hey... umm... I have some bad news. You apparently have a high school level reading ability or less, because you completely misunderstood the bill on every single one of your points. I'm sorry you have difficulty with reading comprehension; maybe there are some remedial college courses you could take to improve it?
At least, I assume it's due to a reading deficiency and not intentional dishonesty.
Oh, by the way, to the person who wrote "Members of Congress are exempt from H.R. 3200 because the Bill covers Employment-Based Health Plans [as defined in Section 100(c)(6)] and elected officials are not employees" They'd still be subject to the mandate to get insurance, and as FEHB is a plan for federal EMPLOYEES, it would also have to meet the QHBP standards (after 5 years)
Anon 8:43: I doubt that Ed will see your message about his reading ability here. How's yours?
can anyone who supports HR 3200 explain section 102 to me? It appears from literal reading that if my company's plan either a) adds new members or b) changes costs for a member, then it is not a grandfathered policy. thanks.
Annom 8:43: you are a moron,if you think Congress will be subject to the same lack of health care choices as the general public.
Pathetic idealist thinking. Grow up!
Post a Comment