v
Citizens are told by the federal government to
buy approved insurance plans, instead of arranging to pay for health care the
way free citizens see fit.
v
The federal government approves the insurance
plans that you must buy.
v
The federal government requires that, beginning
in 2014, large employers provide their employees with Obamacare-compliant
insurance plans or pay a heavy fine and employers of any size who provide their
employees with insurance must offer only Obamacare-compliant plans or face
similarly burdensome fines and lawsuits. (26 U.S.C. § 4980H Pg. 1; ObamaCare Sec. 1562(f), Pg. 152),
(26 USC § 4980D Pg. 1; ObamaCare Sec. 1562(e)-(f), Pg. 152; 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Pg. 1; ObamaCare Sec. 1562(e)-(f), Pg. 152) ww.alliancedefensefund.org/obamacare
v The
new law contains 700 references that the (Health and Human Services) Secretary
“shall” determine and “may” determine 139 times. For instance, “The
Secretary shall develop oral health components that shall include tooth-level surveillance.”
Section 4102
v
The federal government controls the amount of
operating rooms there are in hospitals. Sec. 6001 PPACA (Consolidated)
62212y 100 PERCENT INCREASE
LIMITATION
v
“As part of new labeling requirements, she'll
also have the power to regulate a wide variety of foods -- even Happy Meals. A
clause of the law titled "MENU VARIABILITY AND COMBINATION MEALS"
reads: "The Secretary shall establish by regulation standards for
determining and disclosing the nutrient content for standard menu items that
come in different flavors, varieties, or combinations, but which are listed as
a single menu item, such as soft drinks, ice cream, pizza, doughnuts, or
children's combination meals, through means determined by the Secretary,
including ranges, averages, or other methods." http://spectator.org/archives/2010/06/04/the-empress-of-obamacare/1 At first this reads like the Secretary prescribes
the nutrient chart, but read it again; “determining …the nutrient content…” Which
definition of “determine” is used here? To ascertain after observation? Or, to
control and decide?
v
When life issues and “preventative services” conflict,
the Feds via the Secretary determine
the moral decision for insurance companies. K. Sebelius requires “free” coverage for early-abortion
pills, and sterilizations. (Women’s Preventive Services Guidelines and HHS
Mandate Pg. 2) www.alliancedefensefund.org/obamacare
v
Religious exemptions to the HHS mandated
coverage of abortion pills and sterilizations are determined by the Secretary. The exemptions are narrow. Any religious school or charity that
serves people of other faiths is not exempt because it does not meet the
requirements (a Christian soup kitchen, a Catholic school, etc.) Even some
churches are not exempt if they are too focused on serving people besides
themselves. (HHS Mandate Pg. 2) www.alliancedefensefund.org/obamacare
v
The Secretary can fine doctors up to $10,000
if they have part ownership in their hospital and neglect filling out the
correct paperwork informing the Secretary they are part owners. PPACA
v
Employers can either pay $20,000 a year or so
for the family coverage Kathleen Sebelius chooses for them, required by the
PPACA not only for their workers but for all of their dependents as well, or
they can start paying the tax penalties. That includes for those with 50 or
more full-time employees a penalty of $2,000 per year per full time worker
(minus 30 employees), if they offer no insurance. But even if the employer does
provide employee health insurance, the employer is assessed a penalty of $3,000
per employee if the worker nevertheless qualifies to purchase his or her own
health insurance on a state health insurance exchange and does so. http://heartland.org/editorial/2012/08/17/new-face-health-care-irs
v
The Affordable care act creates the
Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). IPAB
is a rationing board.
v The
government denies that it is a rationing board, but “with its authority to
control prices, it will be able to drive Medicare payments so low, doctors will
stop offering key services to patients.” Stanley
Kurtz, National Review
v Dr.
Elaine C. Jones, government relations committee co-chair of the American Academy of Neurology stated, "We are also very concerned about
the power of the IPAB to cut payments to physicians. The sole function of the
IPAB is to cut spending…”Mary Ellen Schneider (March 1, 2011).
"Physicians Offer Rx for Fixing Health Reform Law". Internal
Medicine News.
v Insurance
companies are told who they must insure and how they must insure them. Acting
in unison, there will be scant difference between them, thus creating a
monopoly effect. This monopoly effect is hidden by the ruse of multiple
companies, but really they take orders neither from you nor your employer, they
take orders from the federal government. Their hope is to solicit favor with
politicians to gain recognition on state-run exchanges, and also to protect the
lucrative individual mandate. Instead of focusing on the consumer, sheer
self-preservation will pin their hopes on campaign donations and lobbying.
v
Doctors
recognize this ruse and see it as the worst of both worlds; several big bullies
and one Godzilla bully teaming up against them.
“Eighty-three percent of American physicians
have considered leaving their practices over President Barack Obama’s health care
reform law, according to a survey released by the Doctor Patient Medical
Association.” …co-founder
of the DPMA Kathryn Serkes told TheDC.
“Doctors clearly understand what Washington does not — that a piece of
paper that says you are ‘covered’ by insurance or ‘enrolled’ in Medicare or
Medicaid does not translate to actual medical care when doctors can’t afford to
see patients at the lowball payments, and patients have to jump through
government and insurance company bureaucratic hoops,” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/#ixzz20BUu3Vdw These additional organizations have also registered
their disapproval. “Previous surveys by Athena, Sermo, Deloitte, the Doctors
Company Survey, the Physicians Foundation, and IBD/TIPP have clearly shown that
most doctors are unhappy with the direction of things, and a clear majority are
opposed to the health care law” http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcsiegel/2012/08/12/will-your-doctor-quit-obamacare-foretells-mass-exodus-from-patient-care/
v Like
insurance companies, healthcare providers motivated by self-preservation will pin their
hopes on campaign donations and lobbying. The patient will be reduced to a “Where is Waldo” guy in
a sea of insurance agents, compliance staff, lobbyists, politicians, lawyers and
bureaucrats.
v The
politicking of the healthcare industry will not save them. Godzilla has the
Independent Payment Advisory Board whose meager reimbursement rates for
Medicare/Medicaid can now only be vetoed by a congressional super-majority. The
board is Independent by design, so
that it is more difficult for Congress to rebuke paltry Medicare/Medicaid
reimbursement rates. Healthcare providers will skimp on money-draining
procedures or face closing their doors. Skimping on money-draining procedures
is rationing.
v Citizens
are told by the federal government to buy approved insurance plans, instead of
arranging to pay for healthcare the way free citizens see fit. (It is worth
repeating)
No comments:
Post a Comment