TRUE LIES ABOUT THE SELLING OF THE NEW HEALTHCARE BILL
TRUTH ABOUT PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS
The talk about pre-existing conditions is a HOAX. This one of the big arguments for healthcare and is not true. MOST GROUP PLANS cover ALL pre-existing conditions as you join from another company WITH NO WAITING PERIOD. Their assertions that there are all these people out there that cannot get covered is a lie...A HOAX to scare people in to thinking that the government will do it better.
Are there some pre-existing waivers? Yes, there is a small exception base for certian reasons-BUT THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF GAP COVERAGE AVAILABLE TO ANYONE.
And ALL hospitals must treat people regardless of whether they have insurance or not. Yet,some insurance companies have refused treatment for various reasons. The highest refusal rates were from MEDICAID with over 450,000 refusals of treatment in a single year. The Medicaid refusal rate is almost TEN TIMES the refusal rate of the second place insurance company. So how is the government going to cut down on pre-existing conditions exceptions WHEN THEY ARE THE WORST VIOLATORS?
PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS DON'T APPLY FOR THOSE WHO HAVE HAD CONSTANT MEDICAL INSURANCE COVERAGE DURING THE PAST 12 MONTHS. ALL
Those groups that don’t allow an exemption generally provide coverage in the following manner. If a person had an illness that qualifies for the pre-existing waiver (many conditions do not qualify and ALL insurance policies carry a specific list before you sign), and if they DID NOT HAVE ANY COVERAGE during the past 12 months they may have a pre-existing condition waiver if they sign up to a new insurance company that has re-existing exclusions (It’s a small percentage). The standard waiting period is 12 months for a pre-existing condition. After that they are covered for everything because pre-existing coverage is waived. They also get one month wait waived for every month that they were covered during the past 12 months.
Most people can extend their current coverage because COBRA COVERS THOSE WHO HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE 12 MONTH WAITING PERIOD if they leave their current company and go to a company with pre-existing condition waivers. They just stay insured on at their old company till their waiting period is up.
If a person has a serious problem they can go to a GUARANTEED ISSUE or to MEDICAID and any number of other government gap insurance plans available if a person is unemployed. If someone just wants free medical they should just move to Canada or Cuba and not mess up the health care of other responsible Americans.
A person can ALSO start their own group with no pre-existing conditions with as few as three people. Where people have problems is when they go all their lives’ with no medical care and need a $50,000 operation and expect to get full coverage after they make one payment to a new insurance company. This is America and freeloaders will have problems here if they are expecting to be coddled.
For 15 years Massachusetts has also imposed mandates known as guaranteed issue and community rating -- meaning that insurers must cover anyone who applies, regardless of health or pre-existing conditions, and also charge everyone the same premium (or close to it). Yet these mandates allow people to wait until they're sick, or just before they're about to incur major medical expenses, to buy insurance. This drives up costs for everyone else, which helps explain why small-group coverage in Massachusetts is so much more expensive than in most of the country. (July 11, 2009 Wall Street Journal) http://www.examiner.com/x-15928-Boston-Statehouse-Examiner~y2009m7d13-Massachusetts-health-care-verdict-negative
Pre-existing conditions clause is more of a motivation tactic to try to get and keep people to stay insured. Isn’t that what government really wants-to keep people insured?
HEALTH CARE FOR ALL
Not really. The current plan may leave a gap of 17 million people still uninsured. According to recent studies there are about 8-15 million people right now with no healthcare. So what’s the point to enlist a new system that won’t cover those who it intends to help? SIMPLE. They will cover ALL the poor (who are not covered now) and shift the uninsured to the top rungs of the tax payers to fend for themselves and pay any amount demanded by the government. What will they be told when the rates seem to be just another confiscatory tax? You have enough money and you need to be fair and help support others. How about when the government says “You have had a good life now take these pills” http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/20/the-myth-of-the-46-million
ALL FEDERAL WORKERS (mainly liberal voters) will be exempt from this new bill, Congress and the entire government will be exempt, Veterans will be exempt (for a time) and MANY UNIONS will be exempt. Those who earn over $88,000 may have some form of a mandatory premium as well as huge taxes everywhere to pay for this nightmare. And Social Security (13% with employer contribution) will be increased to higher levels will add hidden costs to all except CONGRESS-who does not pay into the social security fund. Many VISA holders working in the US are exempt (F, J, M, Q, G) non-resident aliens self employment. Some federal employees receive social security but do not pay into the system, and may also include state and local employees including schools and college employees... http://www.ssa.gov/gpo-wep/.
THERE WILL BE NO LINES OR DEATH PANELS
Look at cash for clunkers and the auto industry. The first thing government does to cut costs is to shrink the distribution system to reduce and delay payments. Look at the auto industry. By reducing the number of dealers they will artificially reduce the warranty work that can be performed. Look at cash for clunkers payment record. Dealers have been paid an average of 2%-5% after 60 days when the government promised 10 days for payment. How did the government perform this magic feat? They only hired 400 workers to process almost a million claims. Created massive amounts of complicated paperwork and provided a computer server that could not possibly handle the volume. They then blamed it on the dealers and rejected paperwork with the reason on some forms for rejection being listed as “NO REASON” and others are simple misspellings. How many dealers will just give up and eat it?
This is not an anomaly it is a business model for the government. How many people will give up when trying to discover the source of a pain or an ailment? How many of those who fail to get treatment will end up dying from a more serious development like cancer? Is there a death panel? What’s the difference what you call it if patients end up dead?
Medical will be the same government business model of confusion, waste, delay and denial. Many Doctors do not take Medicaid. As the government takes over costs will go up to process the new government paperwork and payments will be cut. Proposals such as outcome based payments, periodic payments and reduced payments will choke the cash flow of Doctors-who are actually small businesses.
My guess is that 25% of the Doctors will retire early. If they do not take Medicaid now-why would they want their entire practice transformed into a Medicaid center? Another 25% may go out of business or go back to school to become lawyers (12-18 months of post grad) and sue the Doctors in what will be a very lucrative profession as government procedures interfere with patient care who then sue the doctors for malpractice and get paid by rich malpractice insurance companies.
As the number of Doctors is reduced, health care is reduced, and government bureaucrats’ will create ever restrictive levels of care to reduce care and cut costs, increase lines and waiting and people will die from lack of care. Who decides and who is accountable for mistakes?
And while letting the elderly die because they are giving free Viagra to child sex offenders
How about free $10,000 boob jobs for 17 year olds-paid for by government medicine (NHS)
MANDATES THAT EVERYONE HAS TO PAY FOR
What is a mandate? It is a cash cow for Congress. That is because lobbyists have to lobby and pay millions of dollars as campaign contributions to their political PAC’s and campaign coffers for years to get each specific mandate entered into a bill to be REQUIRED BY LAW to be mandated as covered by private insurance policies that everyone has to buy.
All these mandates are paid for by groups seeking to get its specialty entered into the medical insurance system. Medical insurance means BIG WINDFALLS for Doctors in each specialty. But the majority of these mandates should be paid for by those who are receiving the care-not provided for free and paid for by the rest of us.
Breast reductions, implant removal and easily deceived breast implants
Massage
Breast reduction
Hair Wigs
Acupuncture
Alcohol treatment
Home health care
Varicose vein removal
Hormone replacement therapy
Midwives
In vitro-fertility (Octo-moms anyone?)
Telemedicine
Hospice
Drug abuse treatment,
Preventative care
Marriage counseling
Glasses
Pastoral counseling?
Port Stain elimination?
Smoking cessation
Speech Therapy
Massachusetts state-run healthcare costs have skyrocketed because of new mandates added after it was taken over by the State and run by politicians instead of people and Doctors. It has added 16 NEW MANDATES to an already overstressed system that has seen health care costs increase 47% in three years. AND IS CONSIDERING 70 ADDITIONAL MANDATES that will raise healthcare through the roof, flood Doctor’s office with new patients seeking free services and cause more problems for Doctors who get lower reimbursement rates and don’t get paid on time by the government running the mess. Lines are the longest in the nation right now (8 weeks for primary care) and can only get longer as politicians rig the system for political campaign contributions and kickbacks instead of the practice of medicine. WHO WINS…The Legislators of course.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10488
Hair transplants, sex changes, wine stains, marriage counseling…It’s all FREE to anyone who wants them because they are paid for by YOU, paid for under current government MANDATES forced upon your medical insurance carrier (not Medicaid or Medicare) after the medical lobbyists paid HUGE campaign donations, gave free trips and more to your Senators and Congressional representatives to get these mandates placed into law and just added it to monthly healthcare premium. It’s one reason your healthcare is so expensive. THE GOVERNMENT. And Congress said that once their new healthcare plans are passed-the mandates will increase. Hey, they need the campaign donations. Why not? How else can they stay in office? You surely won’t vote for them anymore.
COSTS WILL DROP
This is a fallacy because the facts are opposite. Massachusetts has a new public healthcare system. Its costs are up 48% and have the longest waiting lines in the country-8 weeks to see a primary care doctor, if you can even get one. Other country’s world-wide, experience the same cost structure increase and long waiting lines.
GOVERNMENT WILL INSURE EVERYONE
Unfortunately this is not borne out by the facts. This situation was a driving factor for Mass health care. However, once they instituted the new state government system there is still an uninsured number of 2.5%. If this same model is repeated nationwide it will only cover about 50% of the actual uninsured which will leave about 7 million still uninsured. But, this administration has stated that there will most likely be a balance of around 13 million people who are uninsured once this new healthcare bill is in place. Funny because that is about the same number that is uninsured right now based on non-partisan numbers.
PREVENTATIVE CARE WILL PROLONG LIFE AND SAVE MONEY
Not really. The fact is that increasing Doctor visits for all will crowd out those who are sick and need care quickly, who will quickly get sicker and possible die from a lack of a speedy diagnosis and treatment. It will also increase costs substantially because of increased visits, testing and treatments. Most preventative care will make no difference in longer life and those who do live longer as a result will cost the system more. http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/ba188.pdf
HALF OF ALL BANKRUPTCIES ARE CAUSED BY INSURANCE NOT COVERING COSTS
Just a plain lie. Most bankruptcies that involved medical reason are a result of JOB LOSS-not medical bills. Currently personal bankruptcies in this country are about .2% of the population. Those caused by medical costs are about 17% of that .2 number.
“Dranove and Millenson critically analyzed the data from the 2005 edition of the medical bankruptcy study. They found that medical spending was a contributing factor in only 17 percent of U.S. bankruptcies. They also reviewed other research, including studies by the Department of Justice, finding that medical debts accounted for only 12 percent to 13 percent of the total debts among American bankruptcy filers who cited medical debt as one of their reasons for bankruptcy.
As for the notion that greater government involvement in health insurance will reduce bankruptcy, it is helpful to compare personal bankruptcy rates in the United States and Canada. Unlike the United States, Canada has a universal, government-run health insurance system. Following the logic of Himmelstein and colleagues, we should therefore expect to observe a lower rate of personal bankruptcy in Canada compared to the United States.
Yet the
evidence shows that in the only comparable years, personal
bankruptcy rates were actually higher in Canada. Personal bankruptcy filings as a percentage of the population were 0.20 percent in the United States during 2006 and 0.27 percent in 2007, almost 50% HIGHER. In Canada, the numbers are 0.30 percent in both 2006 and 2007. The data are from government sources and defined in similar ways for both countries and cover the time period after the legal reforms to U.S. bankruptcy laws in 2005 and before the onset of the 2008 economic recession.”In fact, in the Canadian government found that approximately 15% of the bankruptcies in Canada were caused by health care expenses not covered by their own universal health care. “
Do we want to base our decisions on false truths propagated by those who are trying to change the system? If it is truly a BETTER SYSTEM, why is there no data to prove it, when the facts and data actually prove otherwise?
It’s possible to cut medical costs by OVER 50% and there is a world-wide study done by PRICE WATERHOUSE to prove it.
I believe that the Government has created a scheme to increase the cost of medicine over the years in order to make the government option appear more attractive. Is the US cost of medicine high…YES IT IS. And it is because the government filled it with WASTE AND FRAUD that we can get out if we demand it.
The real cost of health care can be easily 50 – 60% LOWER than what we are paying now, Which in fact-would be more in line with what other countries are paying now worldwide. The FACTS are here now. THESE FACTS ARE A RESULT OF A WORLD WIDE HEALTHCARE SURVEY DONE BY PRICE WATERHOUSE-ONE OF THE LARGEST ACCOUNTING COMPANIES IN THE WORLD.
The high cost of medicine in this country is NOT the private sector running WILD-It’s THE GOVERNMENT forcing costs higher ARTIFICIALLY in order to get to their ends of government controlled healthcare. It's unconstitutional control of the marketplace in order to provide unprecedented control to government.
If cash for clunkers, reduced and delayed income reimbursement, outcome based reimbursements, and lump sum quarterly reimbursements is any idea of how the government will run the entire health spectrum, expect 25% of Doctors will quit or retire in the first few years and another 25% will go out of business waiting for payment or will be underfunded. Don’t forget-A Doctor can go back to school and be a lawyer in 18 months or less and start making a FORTUNE suing Doctors for mistakes caused by government interference in patient care.
We will have 50 million more people getting crammed into a system that will shrink its distribution of services by possible up to 50% of its outlets in just a few years which is exactly what happened to Canada and other places worldwide. Why do you think that Obama wants to wait till 2013 to implement his new idea? Because it will be a NIGHTMARE.
A GOOD SOLUTION FOR GOVERNMENT IN HEALTHCARE
Leave insurance and healthcare alone. Don’t force everyone to buy healthcare insurance. It will not drop costs and will not decrease the uninsured. Why is it that we don’t have new car insurance to pay for new cars when our old one wears out? Why do we not have new house insurance when our family outgrows the old one?
This is America and the government should not be dictating what we should or should not buy. Illegal aliens without ID, social security or citizenship can get loans to buy $1,000,000 homes, $50,000 cars or anything else they want. Anyone poor person can get qualified for government backed college well into the six figures.
Why is there no financial instrument for health care disasters? In the event of a medical disaster many of the uninsured young or poor can get no loan assistance which forces others to make up the difference in increased healthcare costs. Do the uninsured car buyers get free cars and homes and force others to pay for them? No, they pay for these debts themselves with a loan.
Why not allow government backed loans for medical emergencies or disasters? If the patient is truly in financial trouble a loan can be backed by the government. If the patient cannot afford monthly payments a small income tax can be added and payment can be forced using the IRS to insure collection as a payment or tax. In the event of illegal aliens, the money could be collected from the country of origin, from trade surplus or other funds flowing to the country of origin. But at least the medical system has a back-up measure of payment.
If a person refuses to pay, yet has the money, the IRS could means test the patient and under certain conditions could seize property to pay for the debt. But the hospital gets paid and legal rights of Democracy could be maintained.
RECEPIENT BASED TAXATION
And as we are talking about social services. Why not require ALL recipients of social services to REPAY the amounts they receive as an additional SURTAX on future earnings? 3%, 5%...20%? After hard working Americans are paying 40% or more.
That’s right, if a person receives unemployment or free medical benefits-that SAME PERSON should pay it back at some point in the future. Why should the person who is NOT RECEIVING THE BENEFITS pay for a person WHO IS RECEIVING the benefits? Not only is it ridiculous, but it motivates the person who is not working and is receiving social benefits to stay on those benefits because there are no consequences. Just a thought…
