Town halls gone wild
By: Alex Isenstadt
July 31, 2009 04:30 AM EST
Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.
On the eve of the August recess, members are reporting meetings that have gone terribly awry, marked by angry, sign-carrying mobs and disruptive behavior. In at least one case, a congressman has stopped holding town hall events because the situation has spiraled so far out of control.
“I had felt they would be pointless,” Rep. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.) told POLITICO, referring to his recent decision to temporarily suspend the events in his Long Island district. “There is no point in meeting with my constituents and [to] listen to them and have them listen to you if what is basically an unruly mob prevents you from having an intelligent conversation.”
In Bishop’s case, his decision came on the heels of a June 22 event he held in Setauket, N.Y., in which protesters dominated the meeting by shouting criticisms at the congressman for his positions on energy policy, health care and the bailout of the auto industry.
Within an hour of the disruption, police were called in to escort the 59-year-old Democrat — who has held more than 100 town hall meetings since he was elected in 2002 — to his car safely.
“I have no problem with someone disagreeing with positions I hold,” Bishop said, noting that, for the time being, he was using other platforms to communicate with his constituents. “But I also believe no one is served if you can’t talk through differences.”
Bishop isn’t the only one confronted by boiling anger and rising incivility. At a health care town hall event in Syracuse, N.Y., earlier this month, police were called in to restore order, and at least one heckler was taken away by local police. Close to 100 sign-carrying protesters greeted Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) at a late June community college small-business development forum in Panama City, Fla. Last week, Danville, Va., anti-tax tea party activists claimed they were “refused an opportunity” to ask Rep. Thomas Perriello (D-Va.) a question at a town hall event and instructed by a plainclothes police officer to leave the property after they attempted to hold up protest signs.
The targets in most cases are House Democrats, who over the past few months have tackled controversial legislation including a $787 billion economic stimulus package, a landmark energy proposal and an overhaul of the nation’s health care system.
Democrats, acknowledging the increasing unruliness of the town-hall-style events, say the hot-button issues they are taking on have a lot to do with it.
“I think it’s just the fact that we are dealing with some of the most important public policy issues in a generation,” said Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa), who was confronted by a protester angry about his position on health care reform at a town hall event several weeks ago.
“I think in general what is going on is we are tackling issues that have been ignored for a long time, and I think that is disruptive to a lot of people,” said Bishop, a four-term congressman. “We are trying, one by one, to deal with a set of issues that can’t be ignored, and I think that’s unsettling to a lot of people.”
Freshman Rep. Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.), whose event at a Syracuse middle school was disrupted, said that he still planned to hold additional town halls but that he was also thinking about other options.
“I think you’ve got to communicate through a variety of different ways. You should do the telephone town hall meetings. You should do the town hall meetings. You should do the smaller group meetings,” said Maffei. “It’s important to do things in a variety of ways, so you don’t have one mode of communication.”
“You’re going to have people of varying views, and in this case, you’ve got the two extremes who were the most vocal,” Maffei said of the flare-up at his July 12 event.
On Tuesday, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who handles incumbent retention duties for House Democrats in addition to chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, met with freshman members to discuss their plans for the monthlong August recess. While the specific issue of town hall protesters never came up, according to sources familiar with the meeting, he urged them not to back away from opponents.
“He said, ‘Go on offense. Stay on the offense. It’s really important that your constituents hear directly from you. You shouldn’t let a day go by [that] your constituents don’t hear from you,’” said one House Democratic leadership aide familiar with the meeting.
Some members profess to enjoy the give-and-take of the town halls, even if lately it’s become more take than give.
“Town halls are a favorite part of my job,” said Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-Mo.), a third-term congressman from St. Louis who noted that a “handful” of disruptions had taken place at his meetings. “It’s what I do. It’s what I will continue to do.”
“People have gotten fired up and all that, but I think that’s what makes town halls fun,” said Perriello, a freshman who is among the most vulnerable Democrats in 2010. “I think that most of the time when we get out there, it’s a good chance for people to vent and offer their thoughts. It’s been good.”
“I enjoy it, and people have a chance to speak their mind,” he said.
Both Carnahan and Perriello said they were plunging forward with plans to hold more town hall meetings.
Republicans, with an eye toward 2010, are keeping close track of the climate at Democratic events.
“We’ve seen Russ Carnahan, we’ve seen Tim Bishop, we’ve seen some other people face some very different crowds back home,” said National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas). “The days of you having a town hall meeting where maybe 15 or 20 of your friends show up — they’re over. You’ve now got real people who are showing up — and that’s going to be a factor.”
Asked later how or whether the GOP would use the confrontations against Democrats, Sessions responded: “Wait till next year.”
But Democrats are quick to point out they’re not the only ones facing hostile audiences. They single out Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.), who found himself in a confrontation earlier this month with a “birther” protester, and insist that Republicans face a backlash of their own if it appears the party is too closely aligned with tea party activists or other conservative-oriented protesters.
“It’s a risk that they align themselves with such a small minority in the party,” said Brian Smoot, who served as political director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the past election cycle. “They risk alienating moderates.”
Last edited on Fri Jul 31st, 2009 04:31 pm by Garden Queen
It's intriguing that media psychologically/symbolically tracks the times. For a while we had Pirate films galore such as Pirates of the Caribean paralleling Corporate piracy of the USA, then we had vampires with the hugely popular Twilite, paralleling government sucking taxpayers on Main Street to feed Wall Street. Now we have LESBIAN VAMPIRES following the left-wing government with energy taxes to feed their bloated forms and Wall Street too. It is no wonder that the villagers are grabbing torches and pitchforks.
Decent British comedy best watched after a few pints.
____________________ Pecca fortiter, sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo!
Galactic Signature: Blue Self-Existing Monkey
You’ve heard a lot about this crazy, scary, vicious mob on some shadowy GOP payroll. By the way the DNC, Rachel Maddow, and President Obama talk, you’d think it was a motley crue of Hell’s Angels.
Let me introduce you to the mob:
one of several snapshots
I am the mob. My kids are the mob. My grandma is the mob. My family members did not shed blood for this country so that their elected officials could silence them into shame if they dared to speak out and voice their concerns.
Are you the mob?
____________________ Politicians and diapers should be changed often - for the same reason!
_________________
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit. Proverbs 18:21
In almost twenty years of full time activism, rarely have I seen such an uproar as we're seeing over Comrade Obama and Congress' attempt to take over another private industry. My email box has been deluged with hundreds of messages every day for weeks about this so called health care reform. Americans have read the fine print and gone ballistic, as well they should. The wrath of the American people is long over due.
These craven jackals in Congress have become fearful of the American people exercising their right to demand their elected representatives in Congress do what they want, not what special interests pay these prostitutes to do for them. As a result, the usual propaganda has been unleashed on the "mobs" attending town hall meetings. Americans who understand what is at stake are being attacked with the precision of what was done in Stalinist Russia.
Cable networks are filling the airwaves with enough gas from "experts" to fuel every car in America for the next ten years. Keith Olbermann, master of manipulating the truth, is one of the ring leaders attempting to take the focus away from the real issue regarding health care "reform" to the worn out America doesn't want a black president. Here's a clue for the factually challenged Olbermann: Comrade Obama is half Caucasian and half Negro. The issue isn't skin color, it is the fact that Obama/Soetoro is an usurper; a devout Marxist who has his agenda and he's rolling forward at hyper speed.
Bill Press, who suffers from a common condition throughout America affecting millions of men, absence of testicles, said, "Town hall 'bullies' are 'taking a page right out of a Nazi playbook." He's so ignorant he doesn't even know our legal form of government. Sorry, Bill, America is not a democracy. Press isn't alone with his medical condition. Congressman Perlmutter [D-CO] sat at a desk hidden behind a wall at his recent town hall meeting so he wouldn't have to face his constituents!
Lost in all the hysteria being pumped out by these wretched outlaws in Congress and the liars for hire in the MSM is the real question: Does Congress have any legal authority under Art. 1, Sec. 8, in the U.S. Constitution to legislate health care or treatment within the states of the Union? No.
Health care is not a "human right." It is not a constitutional right.
Go read Art. 1, Sec. 8 of the Constitution. No where is Congress authorized to set up, run or legislate in the area of medical care, health care or whatever you want to call it. None. I've been watching the videos of the town hall meetings. In a couple of them, Americans have stood up at the microphone and said the government has no right to legislate health care in this country. Get government out of our health care system! Excellent.
Tens of millions of Americans will tell you they support the Constitution, but if it interferes with what they want or need, toss it. Instead of booting the outlaws in Congress who have destroyed the finest health care in the world over the past 50 years, throw out the law of the land instead. And, people wonder why Americans are fighting their fellow Americans over this phony "health care reform"? The Constitution matters.
Many of the provisions in the bill are outright control of medical treatment and telling doctors and health care workers what they can or can't do and what they will be forced to do despite the rhetoric oozing from supporters of this grotesque legislation. What have the courts ruled in the past?
In Linder v. United States, 268 U.S. 5, 18, 45 S. Ct. 446 (1925), The court ruled: "Obviously, direct control of medical practice in the of states is beyond the power the federal government."
In U.S. v. Anthony, 15 Supp. 553, 555, (S.D. Ca., 1936) and U.S. v. Evers, 453 F. Supp. 1141, 1150 (M.D. Ala., 1978), the court ruled: "...The direct control of medical practice has been left to the states."
There is no question this legislation contains hundreds of provisions that the court has ruled unconstitutional; click here. The courts have ruled that Congress overstepped their legislative authority and that is how we attack this monstrous piece of legislation.
I'm certain there are more cases on the books. It is these rulings, coupled with a massive outcry back when Comrade Hillary Clinton tried to shove "universal health care" down our throats that we defeated it. Comrade Clinton's legal minions reminded her that what she was trying to do would NOT withstand a constitutional challenge:
"Memorandum for Walter Zellman from Sallyanne Payton, clearly marked: Preliminary Draft for Official Use Only. Do Not Quote or Release For Any Purpose, page 4, Health Care Task Reform under Hillary Clinton:. Please note these sections:
"(b) may the federal government use other actors in the governmental system and the private sector as its agents and give them orders as though they were parts of a prefectorial system? The short answer is "no." State governments are independent, although subordinated, sovereignties, not subdivisions of the federal government.
"Although the federal government may regulate many of their functions directly [as well, for example, it subjects state water districts to the Clean Water Act], it may not require them to exercise their own governmental powers in a manner dictated by federal law. The states may be encouraged, bribed or threatened into entering into joint federal state programs of various sorts, from unemployment insurance to Medicaid; but they may not be commanded directly to use their own governmental apparatus in the service of federal policy. There is a modest jurisprudence of the Tenth Amendment that seems to have settled on this proposition. See the DOJ [Dept. of Justice] memorandum for a fuller elaboration."
As for AARP's role in this nightmare, I have never belonged to AARP. That organization supports the privately owned Federal Reserve and is nothing more than a shill for big government. AARP is not a friend to senior citizens and I hope every single American who belongs to AARP does what a man did the other morning on FOX news: cuts up his AARP card and drops his membership.
continued
____________________ Politicians and diapers should be changed often - for the same reason!
_________________
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit. Proverbs 18:21
According to Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois these Town Hall protests are "clearly being orchestrated, and these folks have instructions. They come down from a Texaslobbyist in Washington," he said.
What a hoot!
This is the antics of the Trickster. I got a good laugh.
____________________ Pecca fortiter, sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo!
Galactic Signature: Blue Self-Existing Monkey
"Reagan never really got what he was talking about when he said "government is the problem"
I think Reagan was hinting at the globalist - meaning "government (controlled by the elitist) is the problem."
You're right, however, we do need the Tenth Amendment state sovereignty. But it seems our reps are intimidated by Gregoire. If only they had the balls...
excerpts: These craven jackals in Congress have become fearful of the American people exercising their right to demand their elected representatives in Congress do what they want, not what special interests pay these prostitutes to do for them. As a result, the usual propaganda has been unleashed on the "mobs" attending town hall meetings. Americans who understand what is at stake are being attacked with the precision of what was done in Stalinist Russia.
Cable networks are filling the airwaves with enough gas from "experts" to fuel every car in America for the next ten years. Keith Olbermann, master of manipulating the truth, is one of the ring leaders attempting to take the focus away from the real issue regarding health care "reform" to the worn out America doesn't want a black president. Here's a clue for the factually challenged Olbermann: Comrade Obama is half Caucasian and half Negro. (Actually, he's half Caucasian, 4% Negro and 46% Arab. His 46% Arabic bows to the king of Saudi Arabia.) The issue isn't skin color, it is the fact that Obama/Soetoro is an usurper; a devout Marxist who has his agenda and he's rolling forward at hyper speed.
Bill Press, who suffers from a common condition throughout America affecting millions of men, absence of testicles, said, "Town hall 'bullies' are 'taking a page right out of a Nazi playbook." He's so ignorant he doesn't even know our legal form of government. Sorry, Bill, America is not a democracy. Press isn't alone with his medical condition. Congressman Perlmutter [D-CO] sat at a desk hidden behind a wall at his recent town hall meeting so he wouldn't have to face his constituents!
======
E-mail I just received re: R-71 Protect Marriage Washington
PRESS RELEASE
Monday, August 10, 2009
Contact: Stephen Pidgeon, Phone: Telephone (425) 605-4774
R-71 Campaign Requests Emergency Hearing to seal names of donors
Protect Marriage Washington has submitted a letter (see below) to the Public Disclosure Commission to grant an Emergency Hearing and to otherwise seal the names of donors to the R-71 campaign as a result of threats of violence, including Bellingham, Washington resident John Bisceglia's nationwide inciting to use violence against churches, government property, and ALL of those working on the R-71 campaign. He goes so far as to urge people to get guns and kill. Protect Marriage Washington has not as of yet received a response from the PDC.
"I advocate using violence against the property of ALL of those who are working tirelessly to HURT my family; starting with churches and government property. Government is enabling a vote on whether or not I "should be allowed" to see my husband [sic] while he is dying in the hospital - any NORMAL man would be driven to get a gun and kill those who tried such evil cruelty against his loved ones."
This matter has already been referred to the FBI, because on its face is the incitement to use violence against potentially the Federal Courthouse in Tacoma, and a Federal Judge (and may include a threat against the PDC, the Secretary of State and so on). This is a true threat to the lives and property of those people who support the referendum process - in this case, to validate the actions of the state legislature to modify 201 statutes in a single bill.
____________________ Politicians and diapers should be changed often - for the same reason!
_________________
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit. Proverbs 18:21
"I advocate using violence against the property of [...]"
This brings up a very troubling new policy here in the USA. Acts of politically motivated vandalismof property is now considered Terrorism under the law.
For example if you break into a animal research company or a factory farm, vandalize the equipment, and free the animals then you will be arrested, tried and imprisoned as a terrorist.
See the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act
Hey, speaking of those scary mobs check out this ad by the DNC
____________________ Pecca fortiter, sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo!
Galactic Signature: Blue Self-Existing Monkey
My congresscritter is a dumbocrat, too, and this is what he's up to:
Get this, turns out Rick Larsen is having an impromptu town hall on August 15th and has sent out a memo to the unions asking them to get there early to stack the decks against "the teabaggers."
From an email I received tonight:
Rep. Larsen is having a town hall at the Everett train station Aug. 15th at 5pm
and has asked the union members show up at 3:30 pm to fill the seats before the tea party people show up.
If you are anywhere near Everett and you can show up even earlier, DO IT!!! He is deliberately trying to squeeze opposition out. Do not let him.
Next, please, please take the time to read this*. It is a memo from HCAN (Health Care for America Now) about how to "how to respond to right-wing attacks in the field." You need to read this stuff. Read about their tactics. Read about how they direct their operatives to, "... not debate on their policy points." That's right, they are explicitly ordering their minions to avoid debating actual policy!! And that they should just stick to the main, vague rhetoric of Obama's "3 principles."
Do not let your guard down. Liberty will reign.
*pdf
From: Margarida Jorge To: HCAN Field Partners
RE: HCAN—Responding to Right-Wing Attacks in the Field - August 4, 2009
Since early February, we’ve seen increasing numbers of militant right-wing activists attending public meetings across the country targeting Members of Congress and President Obama. Now in the August recess, the “tea-bagger” protesters and right-wing activists are showing up in larger numbers with a mission to be as disruptive as possible in the hopes of rattling Members of Congress and halting health care reform through pure spectacle and obstruction.
Our response is shaped by 3 things:
Our targets are Members of Congress who must vote “yes” for this bill. Our targets are not the right-wing extremists. The targets of these attacks are Members of Congress. Those Members are also our targets. We need to use these attacks as opportunities to work with the Members in ways that build our relationship in the field and bring us together as allies in health care reform. Members may be more receptive to partnering
with us if they know we will help them combat the opposition.
Our core message is effective, and we should always come back to it. Our campaign plan has always anticipated opposition. No matter what the right-wingers bring up to distract the debate, we should always circle back to our key message. We are on the side of quality, affordable health care for everyone, and we are against turning over health care reform to the insurance companies and lobbyists who got us into this mess to begin
with. We need to educate the press and the public that the protesters are aligned with the corporate lobbyists and insurance companies who are trying to stop reform.
Our ability to put the extremists into perspective helps us frame our narrative. We should be prepared to respond to the other side, but we don’t need to be reactive or feel pressure to answer their accusations point by point. Instead, we should treat them as agents of the insurance lobbyists who want to maintain the status quo.
We can dismiss their radical rhetoric by circling back to the basic things that we know most people care about— affordability, access, and quality.
In many cases, protestors will show up at events or meetings you don’t organize but are participating in as an attendee or sponsor. You can still influence the outcome of these events or meetings, and it’s important for HCAN organizers and leaders to be ready to encounter these protesters in order to make sure that our volunteers and activists respond appropriately as well as capitalize on opportunities to also move our message, work with Members, and educate the public.
it continues but you get the gist of it...
____________________ Politicians and diapers should be changed often - for the same reason!
_________________
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit. Proverbs 18:21
Roy wrote: Yes, here are the communities that are in the process of spontaneously organizing themselves against the intrusion of Obama's policies.
Huh? I thought you believed the U.S. needs some form of universal health care. If so, then how is an attempt to improve the U.S. health care system an "intrusion" that you think people should organize against?
The smear against small-government advocates who have confronted their congressmen at town hall meetings is that they are an "angry mob" who just want to shout down advocates of Obama's health-care bill. In fact, these protesters have come to the meetings to ask some tough questions—questions that should have been asked by the mainstream media. So when you head off to a local town hall meeting during the August recess, focus on asking good questions. I don't mean just rhetorical questions intended to make a point, but also real questions that require a substantive answer.
As a guide to help you prepare for your local town hall meeting, here are my suggestions for 20 questions you can ask your elected representatives about the economics, history, politics, and morality of Obama's health-care plan. If your elected representative will answer these questions, it will tell you a great deal about his principles (or lack of them) and his goals. It might also tell you about his method of making decisions: does he just repeat canned talking points, or does he really think about your questions? And if he won't answer your questions—if he doesn't have the guts to do anything but preach to the converted at union-sponsored rallies—well, that gives you all the answers you need right there, doesn't it?
But don't just ask these questions of your congressmen. Ask them of your friends and neighbors, of newspaper columnists and reporters, of local doctors and businessmen and others in positions of influence. These are the kinds of questions we should all be thinking about and trying to answer, if we are going to subject this legislation to the scrutiny it needs before Congress votes on it.
1. The government has been "reforming" health-care for sixty years—tax breaks for employer-provided health-insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, encouraging HMOs and managed care, and government health-insurance at the state level in Massachusetts, Maine, Oregon. Government health-care has expanded until it is now more than 50% of all health-care spending. Yet after sixty years of government "reform," the problems with health-care are just getting worse. So why should we believe that even more government is the solution?
2. President Obama keeps telling us that he's not trying to get rid of private health insurance. But the bill being debated in Congress would require all new insurance policies to be offered through a government-run exchange, in which the rates that can be charged and the coverage that has to be provided will be dictated by the government's so-called "Health Choices Commissioner." Employer-provided health-insurance will fall under the same regulations in five years. How is this insurance going to be "private" if the government controls everything about it?
3. A video on YouTube shows Barack Obama back in 2003—only six years ago—saying that he is in favor of a "single payer" system. The "single payer" is government, so this means he was in favor of socialized medicine. And just a few weeks ago, Barney Frank—one of the Democratic leaders in the House—said that he considers the current bill a step toward "single payer." So when Obama and the Democrats tell us this bill won't lead to a government takeover of health-care, why should we believe them?
4. Medicare is broke. Social Security is broke. Federal tax receipts are falling, and Congress has already voted on trillions of dollars of stimulus and bailouts in the last year. The national credit card is maxed out. So how can you justify voting for a bill that will require even more money that we don't have?
5. The health-care bill that is being discussed includes huge taxes on businesses to force them to provide more health insurance for their employees, as well as a whole set of mandates telling health insurance companies who they have to cover and what they have to cover them for. This is an enormous increase of costs for businesses and insurers. Have you considered how they're going to pay for all of this, or whether they will even be able to pay for it? How many of these companies will go out of business or lay off more workers after the government forcibly increases their expenses?
6. One of the main demands of the health-care bill is that insurers are required to cover people with "pre-existing conditions." That's like getting insurance on your car after you crash it. It's just a way of getting someone to bail you out for something that has already happened. This isn't insurance, it's a handout. So doesn't that mean that the rest of us will have to pay more for our insurance to absorb the cost of those handouts?
7. The health-care bill will mandate what costs insurance companies have to cover. For example, they will have to pay for routine check-ups and physicals, or they will have to provide every woman with maternity coverage. But what if you don't want to pay for that extra coverage? Right now, if you're young and healthy and don't need frequent check-ups, you can save money with a high-deductible insurance that doesn't cover them. Or if you don't want children, or already have children, you can save money by dropping the maternity rider on your policy. By taking those choices away from us, won't this bill actually make our insurance more expensive, not less?
8. A lot of people have been upset about Congress passing bills that they haven't had time to read—and they haven't even finished writing the health-care bill yet. But what I want to know is, with a bill this big and complex, have you taken the time to read it and understand it? Can you really say that anyone has had the time to figure out how all the parts will work together and what all of the consequences will be? With a bill this big, is it even possible to figure out all of that and really know what you're voting for?
9. President Obama and the Democratic leadership are making us a lot of promises about what we will get and what we won't get from this health-care bill. But what is or isn't in this one particular bill is not the end of the story. For example, how many times has Medicare changed over the last forty years? As more and more of us become dependent on the government for our health-care coverage, won't we have to worry about what some future Congress or some future bureaucrat will decide to cover or not cover?
10. The defenders of the health-care bill claim that it's going to lead to all sorts of savings, not by actually cutting any services or denying care, but just by finding "inefficiencies" that will save money. Do you think this is remotely plausible? When has anybody ever said, "This project has to be lean and efficient—let's get the government do it"?
11. One of the ways that has been proposed for government-provided health insurance to save money is by substituting Medicare reimbursement rates for market rates when paying doctors and hospitals. But many private hospitals and medical practices have said that if they have to accept these lower rates, they can't cover their expenses, and they will go out of business. So doesn't this bill guarantee an immediate shortage of doctors and medical services?
12. Medicare cuts costs by paying lower rates to doctors and hospitals, who then shift these costs to those of us with private health insurance, who get charged higher rates. But if the government takes over and starts dictating Medicare reimbursement rates for everyone, who will the costs get shifted to then?
13. When the government starting portraying people in the financial industry as villains and started limiting their pay and subjecting them to more regulations, banks reported a "brain drain" as smart and well-educated people left the industry or went overseas looking for better pay and less stress. But the term "brain drain" was originally coined in the 1960s when doctors and medical researchers left Britain to escape socialized medicine. Aren't you afraid we might see the same kind of brain drain from the medical profession here in America?
14. Do you know the meaning and significance of the term "quality adjusted life year"? (For this question, you will need the answer, which you can supply if your congressman is forced to admit that he doesn't know it—preferable after some stammering and a long, awkward pause. "Quality adjusted life year" is a term used under socialized medicine to determine whether elderly patients are allowed to get expensive drugs or treatments, depending on some bureaucrat's calculation of how many good years they have left. You should ask your congressman: Can you assure us that the same thing won't happen here?)
15. One of the proposals for how the government is going to save money is that it's going to have a panel of medical experts who will dictate from Washington, DC, what the proper medical practices are that should be paid for, and what practices are supposedly "wasteful" and "unnecessary." Won't this mean interfering with decisions that would normally be made by me and my doctor? And won't this discourage innovation by requiring any new idea to get approved by a board of establishment "experts" before a doctor can even try it out?
16. Government-run health-care is not some new, untested idea. In Britain, it has led to a "postcode lottery," where the medical procedures you are allow to get depend on where you live. In Canada, it has led to a shortage of doctors and waiting lists for major surgeries. In America, Medicare ended up costing far, far more than anyone expected. Massachusetts and Maine spent enormous amounts of money to extend government coverage to very few people. The Oregon Health Plan may not cover your cancer treatment—but it will cover assisted suicide. Given all of this experience, what makes you think that somehow this will be the exception that will avoid all of the problems that government health-care has always led to? (Kevorkian went to prison for choosing assisted suicide for his patients.)
17. Why does "reform" always mean more government? Are you aware of proposals that have been put forward for free-market reforms of health care? Congress has already approved Health Savings Accounts, where individuals buy their own high-deductible health insurance and save money tax-free, which they can use for their out-of-pocket health-care expenses. This gives people more control over their spending on routine medical treatments while keeping them covered for a serious illness, and it allows them to keep their health insurance if they change jobs. But this program has been limited in size. Are you open to ideas like this, for free-market reform of health-care?
18. A lot of doctors say that medical malpractice insurance is what is really driving up health-care costs. Doctors have to charge more to cover their expenses, and they also have to practice "defensive medicine," ordering unnecessary extra tests just to make sure they can defend themselves in court if something goes wrong. So why isn't tort reform—for example, limiting excessive jury awards in malpractice lawsuits—being considered as part of health-care reform?
19. What part of your decision on this bill, if any, is affected by a consideration for liberty, individual rights, and the Constitution? Would you consider opposing this bill for no other reason than because it gives more power to government at the expense of the freedom and property rights of private businesses and individuals? Would you consider opposing it simply because it grants powers to the government that are not authorized anywhere in the Constitution?
20. Thomas Jefferson said, "A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government." Notice what is not on his list: government-provided housing, or government-provided food, or government-provided health care. And Jefferson's views on the role of government were widely shared by America's Founding Fathers. So my question is: Please explain where you disagree with the vision of our Founding Fathers, and why.
____________________ Politicians and diapers should be changed often - for the same reason!
_________________
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit. Proverbs 18:21
deRodes wrote: Yes, we need health care. No, we do not need socialized health care!
The problem I have with Tracinski's essay is that he is coming at this issue from an ideological starting point. Tracinski is a promoter of Ayn Rand's philosophy, and so he naturally views all public policy issues *beginning* with the mantra "Markets are good. Governments are bad." So I'll take anything he says about a specific health care proposal with a very big grain of salt. (For one thing, economists are becoming increasingly aware that "enlightened (rational) self-interest" as the driving, balancing force in a capitalist economy is simply a myth. And self-interest is only one of the factors involved in decisions anyway.)
If "socialized medicine" is bad, as a matter of principle, then how about "socialized education"? Shouldn't we let the market alone rule -everything-, including our children's education? Obviously, I don't think so. Imagine giving some big multi-national "Education Services" corporation, answering to shareholders, control of what your child learns from age 5 to 18 and beyond. To me, saying "let the profit-motive determine" what my child learns as his "basic education" would be very irresponsible. Ed. Services Corp. will of course say wonderful things about the quality of its system, and how it "cares" so much about my child's well-being and future. And it may all be true. But will also all be *secondary* / subservient to the yearly and quarterly bottom line and the value of its stock. What works for the consumer of cars, soft drinks, and TV sets -- material -things- doesn't necessarily work for the "consumer" of health or education.
My point is that in the modern world there are things which are too basic and important to a person's / nation's well-being to be left entirely to the profit-motive. Education, national defence, law-enforcement, . . . and health care. See the last link below for some fairly detailed response to the idea that a for-profit, "market-driven" system is the best thing for trimming costs and providing quality care.
I think a previous post by Phil is worth repeating, since the time-line seems to be approximately the same as trends mentioned in the first link below.
"The present day system was created by President Nixon in 1973, with the support of Democrats, when he initiated the "health maintenance organizations" program—a for-profit, cost-cutting medical intervention, as a foot-in-the-door to replace the existing, working U.S. public-health and hospital system, the 1946 Hill-Burton Hospital Survey and Construction Act. Over the next decades, the HMO system has undermined the U.S. medical care to the point of today's health-care crisis."
If the U.S. had the same highest spending rate -and- the *best* health care, there might be room for saying "don't fix what works." Or if it had the same low-end of the scale results (for industrialized countries), but was keeping costs way, way down, that might also be a reasonable thing to offer in favor of the status quo (at least if cost is your prime consideration.) It's the combination of highest per-capita cost (by quite a margin), and comparatively poor, and declining, average health, that should make any reasonable person say "something is definitely wrong here." (Plus the fact that so many Americans have no insurance at all.)
Here's a link I mentioned above, to an essay on some the "costs" of a mostly for-profit system, summarizing the results of several studies or papers.
There is so much to talk about on this topic. The thing that alarms me the most is the cost of medical care has doubled since 2000. All this at a time when wages and consumer goods prices actually declined. Something is very wrong and the problem must be fixed. We are paying Cadillac prices but getting Volkswagons and most people can not afford Cadillac prices to begin with.
Medicine, traditionally, is supposed to be a noble practice where the profit motive takes a back seat to healing. Even today with corporatized medicine, if a patient explains to the doctor they can not afford the cost doctors do accept "payment-in-kind" - if you know computers and their computer is broken they will let you fix it, or if you know plumbing to fix their leaking fawcets. In China they say "if the chicken farmer gets sick the Doctor gets to eat chicken." So the traditional spirit is still alive but struggling with these corporations and government interventions.
I do not know what the answer is. I am skeptical of the reform being proposed by the US government. When I have some time this evening maybe we can parse through the reform plan and figure out if it is good or wrong headed.
Cheers!
____________________ Pecca fortiter, sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo!
Galactic Signature: Blue Self-Existing Monkey
Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, former Senior Policy Advisor in the U.S. Department of Education, blew the whistle in the `80s on government activities withheld from the public. Her inside knowledge will help you protect your children from controversial methods and programs. In this book you will discover:
how good teachers across America have been forced to use controversial, non-academic me
how "school choice" is being used to further dangerous reform goals, and how home schooling and private education are especially vulnerable.
how workforce training (school-to-work) is an essential part of an overall plan for a global economy, and how this plan will shortcircuit your child's future career plans and opportunities.
how the international, national, regional, state and local agendas for education reform are all interconnected and have been for decades.
<snip>
In 1997 there were 46.4 million public school students. During 1993-1994 (the latest years the statistics were available) the average per pupil expenditure was $6,330.00 in 1996 constant dollars. Multiply the number of students by the per pupil expenditure (using old-fashioned mathematical procedures) for a total K-12 budget per year of $293.7 billion dollars. If one adds the cost of higher education to this figure, one arrives at a total budget per year of over half a trillion dollars. The sorry result of such an incredibly large expenditure-the performance of American students-is discussed on page 12 of Pursuing Excellence-A Study of U.S. Twelfth Grade Mathematics and Science Achievement in International Context: Initial Findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study [TIMMS], a report from the U.S. Department of Education (NCES 98-049). Pursuing Excellence reads:
Achievement of Students, Key Points: U. S. twelfth graders scored below the international average and among the lowest of the 21 TIMSS nations in both mathematics and science general knowledge in the final year of secondary school. (p. 24)
Obviously, something is terribly wrong when a $6,330 per pupil expenditure produces such pathetic results. This writer has visited private schools which charge $1,000-per-year in tuition which enjoy superior academic results. Parents of home-schooled children spend a maximum of $1,000-per-year and usually have similar excellent results.
=======
YESTERDAY ON “ABC-TV” (BETTER KNOWN AS THE ALL BARRACK CHANNEL) DURING THE “NETWORK SPECIAL ON HEALTH CARE”…. OBAMA WAS ASKED:
“MR. PRESIDENT WILL YOU AND YOUR FAMILY GIVE UP YOUR CURRENT HEALTH CARE PROGRAM AND JOIN THE NEW ‘UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAM’ THAT THE REST OF US WILL BE ON ?“ (BET YOU ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER)
THERE WAS A STONEY SILENCE AS OBAMA IGNORED THE QUESTION AND CHOSE NOT TO ANSWER IT!
IN ADDITION, A NUMBER OF SENATORS WERE ASKED THE SAME QUESTION AND THERE RESPONSE WAS, “WE WILL THINK ABOUT IT”! … AND THEY DID IT WAS ANNOUNCED TODAY ON THE NEWS THAT THE “KENNEDY HEALTH CARE BILL” WAS WRITTEN INTO THE NEW HEALTH CARE REFORM INITIATIVE ENSURING THATCONGRESS WILL BE 100%EXEMPT!
SO, THIS GREAT NEW HEALTH CARE PLAN THAT’S GOOD FOR YOU AND ME, IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR OBAMA, HIS FAMILY OR CONGRESS! A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE OVERHAUL SHOULD BE A PLAN THAT EXTENDS TO EVERYONE, NOT JUST US LOWLY CITIZENS. BUT,THE WASHINGTON “ELITE” PLANS TO KEEP RIGHT ON WITH THEIR GOLD-PLATED HEALTH CARE COVERAGES,WHILE WE SUFFER WITH THE OBAMA HEALTH CARE PLAN … AT OUREXPENSE.
=======
President Obama's proposal to expand health insurance to all U.S. residents could cost about $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, according to health policy experts, the AP/Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports.
According to the AP/Post-Intelligencer, administration officials have "pointedly avoided providing a ballpark estimate for Obama's fix, saying it depends on details to be worked out with Congress."
White House spokesperson Reid Cherlin said, "It's impossible to put a price tag on the plan before even the basics have been finalized," adding, "Here's what we do know: The reserve fund in the president's budget is fully paid for and provides a substantial down payment on the cost of reforming our health care system."
Earlier this month, White House Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag said that, although the reserve fund is "likely to be the majority of the cost," the amount of the cost covered by the fund "will depend on the details of whatever is finally done ... as we move through the legislative process."
John Sheils, a senior vice president of the Lewin Group, said the Obama health care reform proposal likely would cost between $1.5 trillion and $1.7 trillion over the next 10 years. In an interview, Sheils said that the cost is "a difficult hurdle to get over." He added, "I don't know where the rest of the money is going to come from."
continued
____________________ Politicians and diapers should be changed often - for the same reason!
_________________
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit. Proverbs 18:21
‘DEADLY DOCTORS’ AS POLITICAL APPOINTEES will decide whether we live or die in Obama’s pending health care plan.
One of these political appointees deciding our fate would be Obama’s top medical adviser, the Zionist Jew, Dr Ezekiel Emanuel. Not one to begrudge himself of participation in nepotism, Emanuel just happens to be the brother of White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, who along with Ezekiel, is a dual-citizen of Israel and the US. The brothers Emanuel have as their father, Benjamin Emanuel, a former Israeli terrorist with the Irgun.
Claiming to be made of “tougher stuff” then ordinary mortals, Dr Emanuel, the chief architect of ObamaCare, now pending in Congress as HR 3200, wants to ration our health care before the arbitration of an elite group of Obama’s death panel bureaucrats, between the worthy and the unworthy.
AND WHO ARE THE UNWORTHY according to this Zionist Jew Emanuel whose loyalties are to Israel first and his own kind? Senior citizens, the disabled, those with Alzheimer’s disease, pre-school children, those with Down syndrome, the mentally retarded, and those, (in Emanuel’s own words in his Hastings Report), “who are prevented from being or becoming participating citizens.” Sounds like Hitler’s Germany does it not?
Indeed, in Emanuel’s OWN ZIONIST-JEWISH WORDS, in his Hastings Center Report, he clarifies his stance of denying government-funded health care to those with Alzheimer’s disease by adding, “An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” View Full Quote Here.
No wonder Obama is in such a rush to get his Health Care Reform Bill rammed through Congress before the August recess. And before the public finds out about the ‘deadly doctor,’ Ezekiel Emanuel, who is also special adviser to his fellow Zionist Jew, Peter Orzag - Obama’s director of the Office of Management and Budget. Indeed, Zionist Jews who have so much money that government-funded health care is not needed by them, are out to deny the rest of us what they have no use for.
DR EMANUEL’S ‘A TIME TO DIE’
FORESHADOWING A PLAN FOR EUTHANASIA, Dr Ezekiel Emanuel, (chief architect of ObamaCare/HR 3200), wrote a review in 2000 for the Journal of Health Politics and Law, of a book entitled, A Time to Die: The Place for Physician Assistance.
After quoting the author’s introduction: “This book is about physician-assisted dying, which I think is both desirable and inevitable,” Emanuel concludes that “social policy should keep physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia illegal but should recognize exceptions.”
And thus we find in Section 1233 of the Emanuel-drafted Health Care Reform Bill, HR 3200, the “death with dignity” clause aka euthanasia through consultations every five years for senior citizens. In other words, WEALTHY Zionist Jews like Emanuel who will have all the care they need lavished on them in their old age, are eager to convince the Gentile-elderly to just get out of their way. View Entire Story Here & Here.
Apart from being granted (or forced) to undergo physician-assisted suicide vis-a-vis Emanuel’s “exceptions,” medical needs such as organ transplants, vaccinations, and even MRIs, CTs and other advanced technology scans that often are critical to identifying life-threatening diseases are part of Emanuel’s Zionist rationing plan.
IN AN ARTICLE that Ezekiel Emanuel co-authored that appeared in the January 31, 2009 edition of the British medical journal, The Lancet, Ezekiel stated that “medical interventions such as organs and vaccines is a persistent ethical challenge when deciding on allocations.”
In addition, HR 3200 includes a provision to severely limit what Medicare pays for CT and MRI scans performed in doctors’ offices. This would force elderly patients to go to the hospital for their radiology — where there are often lengthy waits and endless red-tape for walk-in patients.
And patients in rural areas who must travel long distances to get to hospital-based testing facilities will be discouraged from getting the tests done at all. Restrictions on medical scans, now in force in England, have resulted in the deaths of over 25,000 cancer patients, according to the World Health Organization. View Goodman’s Health Policy Blog Here.
Is it any wonder then that Dr Ezekiel Emanuel, Zionist Jew and dual-citizen, who said that “doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously,” is now being labelled as Dr Death?
____________________ Politicians and diapers should be changed often - for the same reason!
_________________
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit. Proverbs 18:21
There is so much to talk about on this topic. The thing that alarms me the most is the cost of medical care has doubled since 2000. All this at a time when wages and consumer goods prices actually declined. Something is very wrong and the problem must be fixed. We are paying Cadillac prices but getting Volkswagons and most people can not afford Cadillac prices to begin with.
Hi, Phil. Doin' fine, thanks.
I hadn't heard of the cost doubling since 2000. (I did recently hear that health care insurance co. profits have doubled since 2001, while the number of Americans with *no* insurance increased by 17(?)% (not sure - in that range between 15-20). One commentator with intimate knowledge of the industry says part of the explanation is that insurers work hard to limit their payouts, and that is accomplished by refusing or withdrawing their coverage whenever they can minimize the risk of a payout.)
I wondered how that cost doubling compares to other countries, since I know rising costs are an issue all over. Some will claim the U.S. rise is comparable to other countries, but that appears to be quite false. See the graphs mentioned in the quote below.
Nitpicking about what exactly constitutes “enough” cost reduction aside, the bottom line is that we have this thing called the real world to look at to tell us if higher public sector involvement successfully reduces health care costs. Namely, half a century of observational data from the rest of the industrialized world where a vast array of universal coverage schemes ALL of which are utilizing significantly higher public sector involvement in their funding. And EVERY SINGLE ONE has dramatically lower costs.
Yes, France, Canada and the UK have seen rising costs… it may surprise people to learn that aging baby boomers aren’t limited only to the United States… but COMPARABLY rising costs? That’s a purely lunatic statement.
Sorry, NO. The US is *way* off ALL by itself on that particular graph. Clearly breaking from the pack in a bad way.
Being either ignorant of or stunningly dishonest about this fact is going to rather destroy any ability to reach any reasonable conclusions about solutions to the issue.
6. Arguably true, but irrelevant to the provision of insurance when dealing with non profit public sector entities providing it. It always stuns me how many people don’t understand that selling insurance is not like selling clothes, or cars, or fruit. Market competition is a very good thing for the consumer in all of the latter. Not so much in the former.
This is from what appears like a good discussion here: (I haven't read it all through carefully.)
Another thing I agree with in this discussion is the idea that there is a "cost" to simply having so many people with no insurance at all. I heard a U.S. senator claim that in approx. 70% of personal bankruptcies, an injury or illness was a significant factor.
Last edited on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 11:42 pm by Khepri
Khepri, thanks for the information and your great attitude as well.
From what I can see, medical costs go up because we are an aging Boomer population and we have available more high-tech medicine than ever.
The Safeway plan has held down costs since 2005. The participants are paid bonus checks, discounts, that reflect improvement in their health parameters, such as blood pressure, weight and lipid profile.
This works.
I am sure I have a thread on this here. I will be looking for it when I get back.
____________________ "The force and degree of a man's inner benevolence evokes in others a proportionate degree of ill-will" - Gurdjieff
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." — George Orwell
