By Matthew Hunter

Well guys, the cat's outta' the bag. ObamaCare supporters are now openly admitting they don't expect top-of-the-line care without massive rationing, but rather subpar care for all doled out by bureaucrats. A perfect example is a comment left on Dr. Hunter's blog Obamacare Is a Logical Impossibility:

---

Excellent. They can't even keep up the charade for five weeks. How are they going to doctor an entire nation?

Let Your Voices Be Heard

Forrest B. Hunter

Have you given even ten minutes to pay attention to what your President wants to do to you?  If you had, you would not be so complacent.  He wants to control your health care; destroy what you have, or what you are supposed to have.  He wants to go "green" and reduce carbon emissions; save the planet and create millions of "green" jobs.  He is great at telling you what "he" says is wrong; what he doesn't tell you is what he will do, or what it will cost you.  What did he tell you about Gitmo?  Does he have a plan?  If so, what is it? 

Think about it; what did he tell you about the STIMULUS?  We must do it now, or our whole economy will fail.  Congress hurried; have the results equaled even half of what he promised?  Now, he talks about STIMULUS TWO.  Why create a second failure?

What did he tell you about unemployment?  What is the fact vs. his promise?  The promise was that the STIMULUS would create millions of jobs.  If jobs are being created; why does unemployment continue to rise?  It is 9.5 percent and rising.  Remember, the STIMULUS promise was unemployment would NOT exceed 8 percent.  Instead of talking about jobs created, he now talks of jobs saved.    His counting of jobs saved falls into the politicians economic theorem:  We will "project" X million job losses and when we only lose one half of that we can claim we saved 50 percent of them.  He now speaks of "Pay-Go" and claims that means his Administration must know how to "Pay" for something before it can "Go" ahead and spend your money.  Like the game of Monopoly; pass GO and Collect (spend) $200.

Let's get specific.  President Obama wants to save (change) all health care, and insure all that are un-insured, but how does he "Pay Go" for this act of salvation?  He promises he is going to fix Health Care now; does he tell you how much it will cost, how it will be paid for, or where the money is to come from.  Cost estimates are now appearing from everywhere, except from the Obama White House.  In a June 29 interview, the Director of the OMB (Office of Management and Budget ), the White House budget authority, also produced no specific answers.  Director Orszag stated “. . .We have insisted that health reform be deficit neutral within those parameters. Largely, if not entirely, outside CBO's ( Congressional Budget Office )purview is the impact of changes on the health system as a whole (as opposed to the federal budget).” This is bureaucratic double speak for comparing fact with fiction. The CBO uses real numbers and the OMB uses “what if” problematic savings to produce its 10-year guesstimate of future maybe savings.  Remember his STIMULUS job creation and 8 percent unemployment promises? (Read Orszag here.)

June 24, Obama spent 60 minutes on ABC filibustering Health Care and, in typical Obama speak, said absolutely nothing specific about his plan- - -except we must hurry.  However, a letter he wrote to Senators Kennedy and Baucus on June 2 reveals quite a bit of his intentions. One quote in his letter states:  "Health care reform must not add to our deficits over the next 10 years -- it must be at least deficit neutral and put America on a path to reducing its deficit over time. To fulfill this promise, I have set aside $635 billion in a health reserve fund as a down payment on reform."   In the interest of being "deficit neutral", we need to ask where does the $635 billion come from?  Is it real, or an illusion?  It comes from the 2010 Budget thus adding to the deficit. Compare this Obama quote with the June 29 quote by Director Orszag above.

Another quote is: "This reserve fund includes a number of proposals to cut spending by $309 billion over 10 years --reducing overpayment's to Medicare Advantage private insurers; strengthening Medicare and Medicaid payment accuracy by cutting waste, fraud and abuse; improving care for Medicare patients after hospitalizations- - - -The reserve fund also includes a proposal to limit the tax rate at which high-income taxpayers can take itemized deductions to 28 percent, which, together with other steps to close loopholes, would raise $326 billion over 10 years."  Concerning the $309 billion, there are no specifics, only vague generalities.  Concerning the $326 billion, "limit the tax rate" is Obama speak for TAX INCREASE.  It is, however, the only specific identified in the entire $635 billion.  Now, however, Congress is recommending an Income Tax "Surcharge" which will only apply to the “rich”.

One other quote: "I am committed to working with the Congress to fully offset the cost of health care reform by reducing Medicare and Medicaid spending by another $200 to $300 billion over the next 10 years, and by enacting appropriate proposals to generate additional revenues."   In plain English, he is going to CUT Medicare and Medicaid some more to offset the cost of his reform.  His total estimated cost for his Health Care reform is $835 to $935 billion dollars.  It breaks down like this; $326 billion tax increase and Medicare-Medicaid pay the balance of $509 to $609 billion.

He claims that this must be done NOW; we can't wait, we must hurry, hurry, hurry.  Time is against us; this being the same identical ploy used by Obama to pass the STIMULUS and Cap and Trade plan.  We all know what haste produced then; Congress did not read the bills; they just hastened to pass them, and you know the results. On June 26, Congress hastened to pass the Cap and Trade Bill ( 219 yeas to 212 nos ).  This was accomplished with great hoopla amidst pleas for speed and no specifics from the White House.  Again, Congress did not read the bill.  A quick summary: this bill requires someone pay to cap carbon emissions, and we- - you and I- -get to pay for it through sky-rocketing energy costs (your utility bill ).  The White House promises (again) that thousands of “Green” jobs will be created.  Of course, you and I will pay for this supposed job creation.

One last quote from the Obama letter: "To identify and achieve additional savings, I am also open to your ideas about giving special consideration to the recommendations of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), a commission created by a Republican Congress. Under this approach, MedPAC's recommendations on cost reduction would be adopted unless opposed by a joint resolution of the Congress."   (Obama letter).  An inconvenient truth: the MedPAC commission was actually created in 1997 and signed into law by President Clinton.

Read this last quote with extreme care.  It tells you that 17 appointees  (appointed by an Obama appointee) can make any changes they desire to your health care and they cannot  be stopped unless both houses of Congress pass and the President signs a joint resolution prohibiting the change.  (S. 1110).  Also, read news brief here.  Further, Obama asked on July 17 for the appointment of an "independent advisory board" under control of the White House to recommend Medicare changes that would become law when signed by Obama- - no Congressional approval needed.  The real Obama plan is his personal, total, control over your health care.

Seniors, there are 37 million of us; soon to be seniors, there are 75 million of you and the two of us total 112 million.  If just 5 percent of us contacted our Senators and Representatives, that would be 6.6 million phone calls and/or faxes and emails.  Ten  percent the total would be 13.2 million.  Those kinds of numbers get the attention of Congress.  You rose up in objection to the Bush plan to reform Social Security. Why not rise up against government-run Health Care. You do not want Medicare benefits cut to pay for someone else's insurance, and you do not want one person with dictatorial power in charge of your health. 

While you are at it, you can remind Congress you have NOT heard one word about cutting the Congressional/Presidential golden insurance plan.  Remind them that our President said that he would go into the open market with cash out of pocket to obtain such coverage as he deemed necessary for his family, something his plan would deny you and me.  Is he exempt/immune from government run insurance?  Finally, tell your Members of Congress  you will remember in November 2010.  Contact your Member of Congress here and your Senator here.  Time is short.  They have set August 8 as the deadline to rush this monstrosity through the Congress.  Act now!

One last, but very important thing, add your name to a nation-wide protest against ObamaCare by joining Patient Opt Out. Opt Out of ObamaCare here.

An Eighteen-Year Journey With Medicare:

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

Forrest B. Hunter

July 1991 and time to sign up for Medicare; the journey begins, as well as the education that goes with it.  In my case, I found that the education would be self taught brought about by circumstances- -usually not by choice.

 

At the "sign up" I was told what the monthly cost - premium - would be; I soon discovered what Medicare would not cover (pay for). That was the first step in my Medicare education.

The second step was when I determined that additional coverage was needed with a premium that was double the Medicare premium. It is commonly called a Medicare Supplemental Policy and covers most of the items that Medicare does not pay for.  History has shown that such additional coverage is a very wise expenditure- -investment actually.

Medicare Assignment, for any who do not know, is the title assigned when doctors agree to accept the amount approved by Medicare as payment in full regardless of the amount billed by the doctor's office.  If you use a doctor who does not accept Medicare Assignment; you are liable for charges in excess of the assigned amount.

A continuing educational step had to do with covered medical treatment- -of any kind- -where payment is required at time of service (or before ).  When this occurs you have to file your own Medicare claim (sometimes the provider will file for you) and wait for direct reimbursement from Medicare- - this can drag on for months.  The real education starts when you find you have to learn all about filing claims; the proper forms, timing, supporting documentation, disputes, etc.  Additional learning is necessary to be sure you get the proper reimbursement and what is required if you dispute the payment received- - -and whether cashing the check indicates your acceptance of the amount as payment in full.

I can tell you, from experience, that the payment tendered is NOT always correct, and proper.  This is where the "government" bureaucracy raises it's ugly head.  You will quickly learn that far too many "rules and regs" are subjective, and consequently, you receive determinations from the dark recesses of some bureaucrat's opinionated mind.  An unhappy "educational" experience occurred when I ran into a reimbursement problem over Chiropractic Treatments.  A years worth of paid bills was being rejected- -all because some petty bureaucrat was applying "what she thought" as opposed to what the regulations actually said. 

Another year later, as I worked up the line through the protest rules, my case landed on the desk of a "case judge".  He spent less then 15 minutes reading the documentation, and said, "pay the claim".  Another sixty days later a check finally showed up.  In this case the Provider had filed the initial claim forms; when they were rejected I then had to take over.

Since then I have had no reimbursement problems.  I just refuse treatment, from any source, where Medicare payments are not made direct to an approved practitioner who accepts Medicare Assignment.

Another "payment issue" has to do with the annual deductible.  In January / February some doctor offices will demand payment, at time of service, because they assume your deductible has not been met.  You pay and then discover months later that Medicare did not charge that service to your deductible, and paid that doctor also- - therefore a double payment.  Medicare's position is that they are correct and you must get your reimbursement from the doctor- - which will be months after you wrote your check.  In the meantime you will be getting a bill from some other doctor; the one Medicare charged your deductible against and thus has not been paid; which is now your responsibility.

Until January 1, 2009, my medical treatment, and resultant costs, has been below the average for a person my age.  The only serious, ongoing, issue has been the fact that my father died from colon cancer and I have inherited the genetic tendency for the same cancer.  A very good Gastroenterologist, an annual (sometimes more ) colonoscopy has always caught, and removed the pre cancerous polyps.  Also, like most people my age, I had Cataracts removed from both eyes.  A complication from the removal in the left eye necessitated a Corneal Transplant in early 2005.  

Shortly after January 1, 2009 I asked my Rheumatologist a question about a routine medication ( prednisone ) I was taking.  After checking my heart beat, he suggested I see a Cardiologist.  After some six inconclusive tests the Cardiologist recommended a Heart Catheterization, which revealed two blockages—one referred to as the so-called Widow Maker.  A Heart Surgeon happened to be in the next room and he with my Cardiologist explained the situation and recommended By-Pass Surgery, which was performed on March 31, 2009.

President Obama is pushing for health care reform—make it available for all.  As usual, he is long on words, and short on plans  (think Gitmo).  He is, as always, declaring it must be done now (it is an emergency); Congress must approve it and we will work out the details later.  After seeing the results of his "hurry up" Stimulus Plan any thinking person, senior or otherwise, will say NO to this medical cloud of smoke.

The one thing that is obvious is the intent to nationalize health care into one big government program.  All indications are a program patterned after the European Canadian models. 

Let's look at my recent experience.  My first appointment with a Cardiologist was on January 26, 2009. I then underwent seven tests and / or procedures involving three separate doctors that culminated with the March 31 By-Pass Surgery.  In nine weeks I went from initial consultation to performance of major cardiac surgery. 

There is NO place in the world where you can obtain this type of insured medical treatment except in the United States.  In the "other world" models it takes six months, or longer, just to see a specialist let alone obtain treatment.  Government-run health care means that all services beyond those provided by one’s primary physician first must be recommended by this primary physician.  Second, it must be approved and recommended by a government bureaucrat setting in some office somewhere.  This person is not a doctor, has never seen you (probably has never seen your doctor either) and is located miles from you.  This Great, Unknown Guru is going to determine, sometime, your future medical treatment using some mysterious formula that is based on what—age, sex, race, geographical location, medical history?  If the verdict is yes, then you can have a treatment/procedure determined by the bureaucrat; then the waiting period begins. 

I had available to me, if I wished, Residence Rehabilitation, which would have provided daily physical therapy, occupational therapy, and other optional choices.  Also available was Home Nursing/Therapy services.  I have opted instead for Cardiac Rehab, three times a week, at my Cardiologist's facilities.  Try and get this care if you are a Senior with the Euro/Canadian form of Nationalized Health Care. To be precise, the Canadian model is not one system of national coverage; it is actually thirteen "regional" programs with varying rules and regulations.

NO, thank you Barack Obama!!

The objective of this blog, as well as The GranGen Alliance is to show and uitlize the similarities young people and retirees share on certain issues, by joining the money with the muscle to fight the Establishment, which enriches itself at the expense of both generations. Please view below where I show this using my adaptation of the Political Circle.

Sometimes the extremes of two opposing groups share more similar core values and interests than with the middle. These two age brackets are heavily affected by economic turbulence and both contain many members who either are out of the work force or only tenuously attached with a clouded future to look forward to. The college-age are either in school or graduating into a situation where they find that their new credentials will not land them a job in a market flooded with such degrees and more experienced people. Retirees are on fixed incomes, which are most subject to the vagaries of inflation and sneaky policies to erode the value of their benefits.

Both groups are also in the most need of healthcare. College-aged adults are either cut off, or preparing to be cut off from their parent’s insurance, and more often than not, unable to obtain it from their employers. Retirees have Medicare, but are constantly having these benefits cut or the co-pays and deductibles raised, and the threat of rationing looms large.

In this way, retirees and college-age adults share many of the same core values and interests, but go about participating in their public objections differently. Young people network with one another online and through school organizations, and participate in rallies and conventions where they will actively protest. Retirees on the other hand, are more conservative in their methods, often writing their congressman, donating to applicable causes, and using more traditional networking at church and community-centered activities.

If we can join the seniors’ willingness to donate money in support of issues directly affecting them personally with young adults’ willingness to participate in person, I think we could really grow our cause effectively.
One final aspect we should consider is that younger people are more willing to donate money to a figurehead, such as a candidate, as opposed to organizations representing a cause. We should look into how we can convince these younger potential donors that their money is put to a better and more direct use when given to us.

In conclusion, this blog would aim to bring together two demographics that benefit from networking with one another and discuss how each can compliment the other. Here is one cute little way I described what I visualized when thinking about how the Retiree and the College-Age Adult relate:

" The political winds blow through three distinct age brackets. First, through the college age, young academics hitting them hardest. Second, through the middle-aged establishment for whom the afore mentioned acted as a wind-break. Finally, the retired community, upon which the full stench of the previous two groups' dilemmas have been blown and now rest”.