Pamela Hall's Pics of 3-20 DC Rally

Pamela Hall has some excellent photos of the March 20th anti-health care bill rally in Washington.

John McCain's Bronx Cheer--Too Little Too Late

I just received an e-mail from John McCain who is calling for the repeal of the health act. Rightly so, but his well taken Bronx cheer is too little too late. It was McCain's support for the Paulson-Bush bailout of Wall Street, an expansion of government that exceeds Obamacare in stupidity, that led to the Democratic majority that in turn led to this botched health care law. McCain says that when a politician goes against the will of the public he will not be reelected. McCain might have paid attention to his own advice in September 2008. His corrupt support for big government subsidies to incompetently run Wall Street firms that in the first place only exist because of big government was just as bad as the current Democratic rush to national bankruptcy and inflation.

John McCain writes:

>I believe the will of the people will be reflected sooner or later. The Democrats will learn in November, that when you go against the wishes of the American people, you pay a steep and heavy price. Americans will not be silenced on this matter and I will continue to lead this fight each and every day.

>I assure you I am not quitting our fight. I believe we must repeal this bill immediately.

Obamacare a Citizen/Boomer Tax

Fox is reporting that Obamacare will pass in part due to the Blue Dog Democrats, all of whom need to be voted out of office, specifically including conservative Democrat Bart Stupak, who is willing to take President Obama's executive order as final proof that the law will not fund abortion. It seems likely that Congressman Stupak was strong armed because no one makes a deal where one side can rescind the deal at any time and the other makes a final commitment. Stupak is willing to trust Obama, and despite the naive arguments of ethics professsors, trust is inappropriate to deal making in politics and business. Certain elements of trust are necessary for a successful society. For instance, we trust that Congress will not violate the Constitution and that the Supreme Court will reverse it if it does. But our trust in that case is misguided, and American society is not successful. But that is a discussion for another day.

Former Lieutenant Governor Betsy McCaughey said at the recent Queens Village Republican Club Lincoln Day dinner that the bill would eliminate hip replacements, knee surgery and bypass surgery for senior citizens and that these operations have added significantly to the quality of life of the elderly. In other words, elective surgery is going to be curtailed. Boomers have been subsidizing the preceding generation through Medicare, Medicaid and insurance premiums, and now they will not receive the same level of care. On the other hand, it will inevitably be true that illegal aliens will receive benefits under Obamacare regardless of the provisions of the act as presently constituted. In other words, the Baby Boomer generation is a generation of suckers. It watched passively as the "greatest generation" sucked Social Security dry and enjoyed ever increasing Social Security and Medicare benefits. Then it watched Social Security curtailed in 1982 (for now the curtailment is merely an increase in the retirement age, but that will be increased further, mark my words). Now it sucks its collective thumb while Il Duce Pelosi subjects them to rationing of the operations to which their parents had open access. I have no doubt that planned suicide will be an important dimension of Obamacare, and progressives at the Washington Post have recently been singing the praises of planned suicide.

Boomers who want knee surgery will need to go to India or Arabia to have the operation done. The rates overseas are roughly five to 20 percent of the rates here in the US. However, they also will be forced to provide care to younger Americans and illegal immigrants with large families, whom Obama and Pelosi view as more worthy of care than middle class Americans. Nancy and Paul Pelosi, of course, are worth tens of millions of dollars and they will be able to pay for their knee surgery out of pocket, as will Barack Obama.

This is not a legitimate law. Congress as an elected body is traitorous, as is Obama. The American system of government has failed. It is time to begin considering a new approach to government, one that resurrects the Tenth Amendment and separates the nation into fifty quasi-independent states. I would like the freedom to move from New York to a free state.

The Progressives' Plan for Your Planned Death

It is revealing that in a week when everyone is riled and activated about health care deform, the Washington Post features an article about planned suicide. I don't normally care what the Democratic Party media has to say (it's always the same monotonous and dim witted line: "We need more government." "We need more government." "We need more government."...) but this article is revealing.

This is the vision for your health care that the Washington Post and the Democratic Party have:

>In the end, they sat together in the cavernous downstairs room of her mother's Cleveland Park home -- Zoe FitzGerald Carter, her husband Joe Guth, and her sister Sarah Barron -- and they waited.

>It was agonizing and terrible, but final. This wait would be the last after years of planning, crying, guilt, resentment, replanning, recommitting. This night meant the end of debating what was legal vs. what was moral, and whether either was as important as what was

>After months of discussion, Mary had decided to end her life not with helium or Seconal but by starvation. The family had been told she would die in a matter of days, but after a week her body was still strong, though she appeared smaller each day, wasting into nothingness. She suffered. She begged Zoe and Sarah -- "Katherine" hadn't come down after all -- for their blessing to allow her to take morphine.

>Mary FitzGerald Carter died a few days after the night of morphine, on July 11, 2001. Her passing brought grief and peace, both in Zoe's ongoing relationship with her mother and in her relationship with her sisters.

Read about the implications of Obamacare here.

Nancy Pelosi: We Have to Pass the Bill So We Can Know What's In It.

First, it's a measure of their suppressive ideology. Second, the Democrats are demonstrable "geniuses." Third, chalk it up to reverse gender discrimination. H/t Porcupine Rim and Gateway Pundit.

Ron Paul on Health Care

Sign petition here.

There is Still Time to Say No to Obamacare

Raquel Okyay has this to say about the Health Care proposal:

"The truth is the President, together with the main architects of the proposed plan - Reid, Pelosi, Baucus and SEIU Boss (and most frequent guest at the Obama-shah White House) Andy Stern have successfully designed a system that over time squeezes out private insurance companies through excess regulation and taxation that will force the federal government to be national insurer and in charge of providing health care to all Americans – make no mistake this has been the plan all along."

Raquel adds a list of the damage that Obama's plan would do:

-Doctors will face financial penalties beginning in 2014 for treating high-cost patients with complex conditions.

-Emergency Rooms would receive fewer resources to deal with higher caseloads of Medicaid patients.

-Health care will be provided to all non-U.S. citizens, illegal or otherwise.

-You will be forced to buy government-run health care under penalty of fines and/prison.

-Imposes almost half a trillion dollars worth of new taxes, fees and penalties on individuals, families and businesses.

-Government tells doctors what and how much they may own.

-Non-resident aliens will be exempt from individual taxes.

Raquel adds a list of Senators to contact:

Here is a list of key Senators – contact one or some of them:

Senator Evan Bayh (IN)
Chief of Staff: Thomas Sugar)
Washington, DC (202) 224-5623 / (202) 228-1377 fax

Senator Michael Bennet (CO)
Chief of Staff: Jeff Lane
Washington, DC (202) 224-5852 / (202) 228-5036

Senator Joe Lieberman (CT)
Chief of Staff: Clarine Riddle (clarine_riddle@lieberman.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-4041 / (202) 224-9750 fax
Hartford (860) 549-8463 / (866) 317-2242 fax

Senator Bill Nelson (NE)
Chief of Staff: Tim Becker
Washington, DC (202) 224-6551 / (202) 228-0012 fax
Chief of Staff: Elizabeth Burks (elizabeth_burks@lincoln.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-4843 / (202) 228-1371 fax

Senator Mary Landrieu (LA)
Chief of Staff: Jane Campbell (jane_campbell@landrieu.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-5824 / (202) 224-9735 fax

Senator Mark Pryor (AR)
Chief of Staff: Bob Russell (robert_russell@pryor.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-2353 / (202) 228-0908 fax

Senator Mark Warner (VA)
Chief of Staff: Luke Albee (luke_albee@warner.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-2023 / (202) 224-6295 fax

Senator Mark Begich (AK)
Chief of Staff: David Ramseur (david_ramseur@begich.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-3004 / (202) 224-2354 fax

Senator Robert Byrd (WV)
Chief of Staff: Barbara Videnieks (barbara_videnieks@byrd.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-3954 / (202) 228-0002 fax

Senator Thomas Carper (DE)
Chief of Staff: Jim Reilly (james_reilly@carper.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-2441 / (202) 228-2190 fax

Senator Jim Webb (VA)
Chief of Staff: Paul Reagan (paul_reagan@webb.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-4024 / 202-228-6363 fax

Senator Jon Tester (MT)
Chief of Staff (Deputy): Mary Walsh
Washington, DC (202) 224-2644 / (202) 224-8594 fax

Senator Olympia Snowe (ME)
Chief of Staff: Unknown
Washington, DC (202) 224-5344 / (202) 224-1946 f

Senator Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Chief of Staff: Elizabeth Burks (elizabeth_burks@lincoln.senate.gov)
Washington, DC (202) 224-4843 / (202) 228-1371 f

Senator Mark Pryor (AR)
Chief of Staff: Bob Russell (email address unknown)
Washington, DC (202) 224-2353 / (202) 228-0908 fax

In the House of Representatives – contact one or more of the following “Targeted House of Representative Members” (Source: Tea Party Patriots): http://teapartypatriots.org/

Rep. Michael Arcuri, New York 24th
http://arcuri.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3665, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-1891

Rep. John Boccieri, Ohio, 16th
http://boccieri.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3876, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3059
Local Office Number: (330) 489-4414, Local Fax Number: (330) 489-4448

Rep. Allen Boyd, Florida, 2nd
http://boyd.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5235, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5615
Local Office Number: (850) 561-3979, Local Fax Number: (850) 681-2902

Rep. Christopher Carney, Pennsylvania, 16th
http://carney.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3731, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-9594
Local Office Number: (570) 585-9988, Local Fax Number: (570) 585-9977

Rep. Gerald “Gerry” Connolly, Virginia, 11th
http://connolly.house.gov/index.html
DC Office Number: (202) 225-1492 DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3071
Local Office Number: (703) 256-3071, Local Fax Number: (703) 354-1284

Rep. Henry Cuellar, Texas 28th
http://cuellar.house.gov/
DC Office Number: 202-225-1640, DC Fax Number: 202-225-1641
Local Office Number: (210) 271-2851, Local Fax Number: (210) 277-6671

Rep. Steve Driehaus, Ohio, 1st
http://driehaus.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2216, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3012
Local Office Number: (513) 684-2723, Local Fax Number: (513) 421-8722

Rep. Chet Edwards, Texas, 17th
http://edwards.house.gov/
DC Office Number: 202-225-6105, DC Fax Number: Fax: 202-225-0350
Local Office Number: (979) 691-8797, Local Fax Number: (979) 691-8939

Rep. Brad Ellsworth, Indiana, 8th
http://www.ellsworth.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4636, DC Office Fax: (202) 225-3284
Local Office Number: (812) 465-6484, Local Fax Number: (812) 422-4761

Rep. Bob Etheridge, North Carolina, 2nd
http://etheridge.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4531
Local Office Number: (919) 829-9122

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Arizona, 8th
http://giffords.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2542, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-0378
Local Office Number: (520) 881-3588, Local Fax Number: (520) 322-9490

Rep. Deborah “Debbie” Halvorson, Illinois, 11th
http://halvorson.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3635, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3521
Local Office Number: (815) 726-4998, Local Fax Number: (815) 726-8024

Rep. Paul W. Hodes, New Hampshire, 2nd
http://hodes.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5206, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-2946
Local Office Phone: (603) 223-9814, Local Fax Number: (603) 223-9819

Rep. Jay Inslee, Washington, 1st
http://www.house.gov/inslee/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-6311, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-1606
Local Office Number: (360) 598-2342, Local Fax Number: (360) 598-3650

Rep. Paul Kanjorski, Pennsylvania, 11th
http://kanjorski.house.gov/
DC Office Number: 202-225-6511, DC Fax Number: 202-225-0764
Local Office Number: 570-825-2200, Local Fax Number: 570-825-8685

Rep. Marcy Kaptur, Ohio, 9th
http://www.kaptur.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4146, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-7711
Local Office Number: (419) 259-7500, Local Fax Number: (419) 255-9623

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, Arizona, 1st
http://kirkpatrick.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2315, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-9739
Local Office Number: (928) 226-6914, Local Fax Number: (928) 226-2876

Rep. Ron Klein, Florida, 22nd
http://www.klein.house.gov/index.html
DC Office Number: (202) 225.3026, DC Fax Number: (202) 225.8398
Local Office Number: (561) 544-6910, Local Fax Number: (561) 544-2864

Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, Florida, 24th
http://www.kosmas.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2706, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-6299
Local Office Number: (407) 208-1106, Local Fax Number: (407) 208-1108

Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 10th
http://kucinich.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5871
Local Office Number: (216) 228-8850

Rep. Jim Langevin, Rhode Island, 2nd
http://langevin.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2735, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5976
Local Office Number: (401) 732-9400, Local Fax Number: (401) 737-2982

Rep. Stephen Lynch, Massachusetts, 9th
http://www.house.gov/lynch/
DC Office Number: 202-225-8273, DC Fax Number: 202-225-3984
Local Office Number: 617-428-2000, Local Office Fax: 617-428-2011

Rep. Daniel B. Maffei, New York, 25th
http://maffei.house.gov/
DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3701, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-4042
Local Office Number: (315) 423-5657, Local Fax Number: (315) 423-5669

Rep. Ed Markey, Massachusetts, 7th
http://markey.house.gov/
DC Office Number: 202-225-2836
Local Office Number: 781-396-2900

Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, West Virginia, 1st
http://www.mollohan.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4172, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-7564
Local Office Number: (304) 292-3019, Local Fax Number: (304) 292-3027

Rep. John Murtha, Pennsylvania, 12th
http://www.murtha.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2065, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5709
Local Office Number: (814) 535-2642, Local Fax Number: (814) 539-6229

Rep. Glenn C. Nye III, Virginia, 2nd
http://nye.house.gov/index.html
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4215, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-4218
Local Office Number: (757) 326-6201, Fax: (757) 326-6209

Rep. Tom Perriello, Virginia, 5th
http://perriello.house.gov/index.html
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4711, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5681
Local Office Number: (434) 293-9631, Local Fax Number: (434) 293-9632

Rep. Gary Peters, Michigan, 9th
http://peters.house.gov/index.html
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5802, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-2356
Local Office Number: (248) 273-4227, Local Fax Number: (248) 273-4704

Rep. Nick Rahall, West Virginia, 3rd
http://www.rahall.house.gov/index.html
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3452
Local Office Number: (304) 325-6222

Rep. Laura Richardson, California, 37th
http://richardson.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-7924, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-7926
District Office Number: (202) 225-7924, District Fax Number: (202) 225-7926

Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, Texas 23rd
http://www.rodriguez.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4511, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-2237
Local Office Number: (830) 757-8398, Local Fax Number: (830) 752-1893

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, Maryland, 2nd
http://dutch.house.gov/
DC Office Number: 202-225-3061, DC Fax Number: 202-225-3094
Local Office Number: 410-628-2701, Local Fax Number: 410-628-2708

Rep. Linda Sanchez, California, 39th
http://lindasanchez.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-6676
Local Office Number: (562) 860-5050

Rep. Kurt Schrader, Oregon, 5th
http://schrader.house.gov/index.html
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5711, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5699
Local Office Number: (503) 588-9100, Local Fax Number: (503) 588-5517

Rep. David Scott, Georgia, 13th
http://davidscott.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2939, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-4628
Local Office Number: (770) 210-5073, Local Fax Number: (770) 210-5673

Rep. Adam Smith, Washington, 9th
http://adamsmith.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-8901
Local Office Number: (253) 593-6600, Local Fax Number: (253) 593-6776

Rep. Peter Visclosky, Indiana, 1st
http://www.house.gov/visclosky/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2461, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-2493
Local Office Number: (219) 795-1844, DC Fax Number: (219) 795-1850

Rep. David Wu, Oregon, 1st
http://www.house.gov/wu/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-0855, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-9497
Local Office Number: (503) 326-2901, Local Fax Number: (503) 326-5066

Rep. John Adler, New Jersey 3rd
http://adler.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4765, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-0778
Local Office Number: (732) 608-7235, Local Fax Number: (732) 608-7268

Rep. Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania 4th
http://www.altmire.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2565, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-2274
Local Office Number: (724) 378-0928, Local Fax Number: (724) 378-6171

Rep. Brian Baird, Washington 3rd
http://www.baird.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3536, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-2478
Local Office Number: (360) 695-6292, Local Fax Number: (360) 695-6197

Rep. John Barrow, Georgia 12th
http://www.barrow.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2823, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3377
Local Office Number: (706) 722-4494, Local Fax Number: (706) 722-4496

Rep. Melissa Bean, Illinois 8th
http://www.house.gov/bean/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3711, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-7830
Local Office Number: (847) 517-2927, Local Fax Number: (847) 517-2931

Rep. Marion Berry, Arkansas 1st
http://www.house.gov/berry/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4076, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5602
Local Office Number: (870) 972-4600, Local Fax Number: (870) 972-4605

Rep. Rick Boucher, Virginia 9th
http://www.boucher.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3861, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-0442
Local Office Number: (276) 628-1145

Rep. Dennis Cardoza, California 18th
http://www.house.gov/cardoza/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-6131, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-0819
Local Office Number: (209) 383-4455, Local Fax Number: (209) 726-1065

Rep. Travis Childers, Mississippi 1st
http://childers.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4306, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3549
Local Office Number: (662) 841-8808, Local Fax Number: (662) 841-8845

Rep. Jim Costa, California 20th
http://www.house.gov/costa/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3341, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-9308
Local Office Number: (559) 495-1620, Local Fax Number: (559) 495-1027

Rep. Artur Davis, Alabama 7th
http://www.house.gov/arturdavis/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2665, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-9567
Local Office Number: (205) 752-5380, Local Fax Number: (205) 752-5899

Rep. Joe Donnelly, Indiana 2nd
http://donnelly.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3915, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-6798
Local Office Number: (574) 288-2780, Local Fax Number: (574) 288-2825

Rep. Parker Griffith, Alabama 5th
http://griffith.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4801, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-4392
Local Office Number: (256) 551-0190, Local Fax Number: (256) 551-0194

Rep. Baron Hill, Indiana 9th
http://baronhill.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5315, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-6866
Local Office Number: (812) 288-3999, Local Fax Number: (812) 288-3873

Rep. Steve Kagen, Wisconsin 8th
http://kagen.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5655, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5729
Local Office Number: (920) 437-1954, Local Fax Number: (920) 437-1978

Rep. Daniel Lipinski, Illinois 3rd
http://www.lipinski.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5701, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-1012
Local Office Number: (312) 886-0481, Local Fax Number: (773) 767-9395

Rep. Jim Marshall, Georgia 8th
http://jimmarshall.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-6531, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-3013
Local Office Number: (478) 464-0255, Local Fax Number: (478) 464-0277

Rep. Jim Matheson, Utah 2nd
http://www.house.gov/matheson/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3011, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-5638
Local Office Number: (801) 486-1236, Local Fax Number: (801) 486-1417

Rep. Michael E. McMahon, New York 13th
http://mcmahon.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3371, DC Fax Number: (202) 226-1272
Local Office Number: (718) 351-1062, Local Fax Number: (718) 980-0768

Rep. Michael Michaud, Maine 2nd
http://michaud.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-6306, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-2943
Local Office Number: (207) 942-6935, Local Fax Number: (207) 942-5907

Rep. Harry Mitchell, Arizona 5th
http://mitchell.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2190
Local Office Number: (480) 946-2411

Rep. Collin C. Peterson, Minnesota 7th
http://collinpeterson.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2165, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-1593
Local Office Number: (218) 847-5056

Rep. Mike Ross, Arkansas 4th
http://ross.house.gov/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-3772, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-1314
Local Office Number: (870) 881-0681, Local Fax Number: (870) 881-0683

Rep. Ike Skelton, Missouri 4th
http://www.house.gov/skelton/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-2876
Local Office Number: (816) 228-4242

Rep. Bart Stupak, Michigan 1st
http://www.house.gov/stupak/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-4735, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-4744
Local Office Number: (906) 786-4504, Local Fax Number: (906) 786-4534

Rep. Gene Taylor, Mississippi 4th
http://www.house.gov/genetaylor/
DC Office Number: (202) 225-5772, DC Fax Number: (202) 225-7074

Brown 52% Coakley 47%...But Will Dem Crooks Cheat?

Martha Coakley just conceded. There is a breath of fresh air tonight, after less than a year of Obamanable government. I'm listening to Sean on Fox for the first time since November and felt that light relief when spring sets in and the snow melts. Actually, we're having a thaw in the Catskills this week too, so maybe we're having an early spring. There's slush all over the place, and Scott Brown won. Yay! Several Democrats in a Fox focus group voted for Brown. They are saying the reasons are health care and government overspending.

After the fact, I'm not surprised at Brown's win. Since I noticed the 2:1 Wall Street donation rate to Obama and the bailout became an issue before the 2008 election, I suspected that Obama's only purpose was to put through the bailout and TARP. He did that and then some, and has been backing Ben Bernanke and the Fed every step of the way. Thus, he has fulfilled his mission on behalf of the Wall Street-Military-Industrial Complex. I told Glenda McGee just a few weeks ago that health care and cap and trade would not pass. I still might have been wrong, but it looks like I wasn't.

Three questions for tonight, one you'll hear on Fox, the other two you won't. First, will the Democrats cheat and delay Brown's swearing in? When Kennedy was elected for the first time the swearing in took one day, according to an announcer on Fox this afternoon. Many of the Democrats in the focus group say that they oppose any delay. If the Democrats act like crooks, they will alienate even more Americans.

Second, and you won't hear this on Fox, I'm not convinced that Scott Brown represents anything other than a reassertion of the status quo, specifically, the big government stasis that has dominated America since the 1960s. I hope he'll prove me wrong. But the fundamental confusion about where the country is going may not have changed. Has it?

Third, and confirming the second point, a large percentage of the Democrats still conceptualize the status quo as "centrist". The status quo is not centrist, it is extremist and socialist. America now is a national socialist state. It is not centrist. It is extremely troubling that many Democrats think that it is.

The Democrats in Congress still may force the health care bill through. If so, they are fools. If health care passes, there will be considerable damage to the economy. Cap and trade, which hopefully will die no matter what, is like a sledge hammer to the real economy. Now it is unlikely to gain traction. The Democrats' forcing health reform will do short term damage. Longer term, though, the Democratic extremists (who call themselves centrists) would be banished for decades.

But would the health care bill be repealed under a future Republican majority? The Republicans have a consistent strike-out record with respect to repeal of failed socialist regulation and spending schemes. Does the election of Brown mean this will change, or do Progressives like Newt Gingrich and John McCain still control the GOP?

Mayo Clinic Rejecting Medicare Payments

Jim Crum just sent me an excerpt from a Bloomberg article indicating that the Mayo Clinic, one of the nation's leading research hospitals, has decided to refuse Medicare payments. This portends ill for national health policy, which has depended on cost shifting. The advocates of national health plans are confronted with basic economics, and so might consider that the health insurance bill might increase demand, hence costs. This would accord with ordinary economics, under which additional supply requires higher prices and demand would need to be reduced to restrain costs. But health reform advocates assert that the problem has an additional wrinkle and that health care costs can be reduced with increased demand.

They claim that uncovered-until-emergency and unpaid-for care has a greater long term cost than covering an additional ten or fifteen percent of the population. But this may not be so because hospitals frequently provide unpaid-for-care, the premise that the reduced-cost argument makes. Because the dynamics of supply and demand are unknown, the best we can say is that there will be a cost shifting composed of four elements: taxpayers, the covered, the uncovered and the health care industry. Given that increasing numbers of people will be covered by mandated care, Medicare will need to provide at least as adequate coverage as mandated care, or the hospitals will refuse it, forcing a redistribution of cost from the hospitals and those in private plans to Medicare recipients now forced to acquire private insurance.

It is clear that the bill shifts costs from those in plans and the health care industry to taxpayers and those who are uncovered because now the uncovered will need to purchase subsidized coverage that had previously been provided at the expense of the covered and the health care industry. The same may be true of Medicare recipients because Medicare shifted costs to the covered and the industry. The Mayo clinic may be anticipating a new reality whereby costs will increasingly be borne by individuals and/or by private plans. Thus, unless Medicare taxes are increased, the health care industry will not find it worthwhile to accept Medicare since refusing Medicare will force Medicare recipients to purchase mandated insurance.

As the government increases health care demand, one of four things must happen: (1) elimination of the cost of delayed care for the uncovered results in cost decreases that exceed the cost of additional coverage; (2) demand for mandated care comes at the expense of some current demand so that treatment of people in private plans is reduced; (3) prices for health care escalate as demand increases across the board; and/or (4) taxpayers additionally subsidize Medicare and mandated plans. With respect to (2), there is likely a considerable amount of care that is currently unnecessary, but it is impossible for government to determine which care is needed and which care is not. Hence, a portion of the population, and how large is unknowable but it won't be insignificant, will be be deprived of care.

It is likely that some who need care now but don't get it will receive care. But that additional care will cost the amount that the health care bill mandates be spent. It will not be free. It is likely that a percentage of those who do not choose to get health insurance now so choose because they are healthy enough to expect few claims. The least healthy who are uncovered received treatment anyway, currently at the cost of those who are covered and the industry. Thus, it is unknowable whether the cost of additional coverage will exceed its value.

One indication of the effects on the health care industry is the performance of health care stocks. These would suggest a net gain to the industry, presumably because more people will pay. In January 2008 the Ishares New York Stock Exchange Index fund closed at $86.35 and on December 28, 2009 it closed at $65.83, a decline of 23.8%. In contrast, the Ishares Health Index fell about 8% during the same period. Part of this much smaller decline may be due to population dynamics, but part may be due to the evolving characteristics of health reform, which seem to increasingly aim at shifting costs onto the uncovered poor.

Thus, we see a health reform movement that claims to help the uncovered and instead transfers wealth from the uncovered to the more affluent people in private plans and the health care industry.


>Dec. 31 (Bloomberg) -- The Mayo Clinic, praised by President Barack Obama as a national model for efficient health care, will stop accepting Medicare patients as of tomorrow at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little.

More than 3,000 patients eligible for Medicare, the government’s largest health-insurance program, will be forced to pay cash if they want to continue seeing their doctors at a Mayo family clinic in Glendale, northwest of Phoenix, said Michael Yardley, a Mayo spokesman. The decision, which Yardley called a two-year pilot project, won’t affect other Mayo facilities in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota.

Obama in June cited the nonprofit Rochester, Minnesota-based Mayo Clinic and the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio for offering “the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm.” Mayo’s move to drop Medicare patients may be copied by family doctors, some of whom have stopped accepting new patients from the program, said Lori Heim, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, in a telephone interview yesterday.

“Many physicians have said, ‘I simply cannot afford to keep taking care of Medicare patients,’” said Heim, a family doctor who practices in Laurinburg, North Carolina. “If you truly know your business costs and you are losing money, it doesn’t make sense to do more of it.”
Medicare Loss

The Mayo organization had 3,700 staff physicians and scientists and treated 526,000 patients in 2008. It lost $840 million last year on Medicare, the government’s health program for the disabled and those 65 and older, Mayo spokeswoman Lynn Closway said.

Mayo’s hospital and four clinics in Arizona, including the Glendale facility, lost $120 million on Medicare patients last year, Yardley said. The program’s payments cover about 50 percent of the cost of treating elderly primary-care patients at the Glendale clinic, he said.

Netty Weisbaum Protests The Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962)

>My letter follows, your own is encouraged to kill this legislation dead in its tracks as we regain control of our country and our lives as American citizens:

Dear Editor:

Passage of the Senate version of H.R. 3962 is the DNC powerbroker's dream come true. Please note my vehement rejection of this legislation:

1.it is unconstitutional

2.it will impose draconian taxation on all Americans and their heirs for generations to follow

3.it will bankrupt small business which is 70% of our economy

4. proposed $1.2 Trillion dollars likely to grow much larger

5.85% Americans like their healthcare plans

6.Obama administration is purposefully encouraging high unemployment as sympathy to ensure passage of Senate version of H.R. 3962

7.bill is not about healthcare, it's about complete control over the lives of all Americans through bureaucracy & thugocracy

8.few legislators have even read what the WSJ calls 'the worst piece of legislation ever written'

9.healthcare could be delivered to all Americans competitively if were to become portable, removing interstate commerce restrictions against sales of health insurance policies and if tort reform were enacted

10.DNC affiliations to lobbyists, special interest groups, such as trial lawyers, George Soros and his global financier pals, DEMAND this legislation to use the United States taxpayer as its personal ATM machine through draconian taxation as redistribution of wealth to the UN, EU, IMF, ad nauseum.

11.passage of the Senate version of H.R. 3962 will give government control of nearly 50% of the U.S. economy

12.passage of the Senate version of H.R. 3962 will ensure DNC control of the United States in perpetuity by creating dependence on the government through entitlement ideology

13.passage of the Senate version of H.R. 3962 is the DNC powerbroker's dream come true.

12.REMEMBER, HOPE’N’CHANGE MINUS FREEDOM=BUREAUCRACY’N’THUGOCRACY!

Best Regards,

Netty Wisbaum, CCIM

Does Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D, NY-22) Support the Obama Plan to Murder Your Grandma?

I have sent the following secure e-mail to the Honorable Maurice Hinchey, Congressman of the Gerrymandered 22nd Congressional district.

Dear Congressman Hinchey:

I oppose the current health care bill. However, this inquiry concerns three related questions: (1) whether Congressman Hinchey has read the Obama health care proposal; (2) whether he believes that voting for a potentially incompetently drafted bill that he has not read fulfills his duties as an elected official; and (3) whether Congressman Hinchey supports the provision in the bill, noted by Dr. Betsy McCaughey in the New York Post, that encourages health policy makers to prevent the elderly from receiving care, i.e., that encourages murder or the elderly to die without care?

I am posting a copy of this e-mail on my blog, http://www.mitchell-langbert.blogspot.com.

There is a rumor flying around the Internet that few if any Congressmen have read the Obama health care proposal. This is because of a recorded statement on Youtube by Congressman Conyers to that effect. I would like to clear the air on this question:

Has Congressman Hinchey read the current health care proposal? I would appreciate your direct written response to this question.

According to the Youtube video of Congressman Conyers, no Congressman has read the bill because it is impossible to do so. Yet, the Democrats aim to pass the law anyway.

If that is the case, do you believe that you would be acting competently in voting for a complex bill of supreme importance that you have not read?

Again, I would appreciate your direct written response to this question. Do you believe that you are acting competently in voting for a complex bill that you have never read?

Third, Betsy McCaughey recently wrote in the New York Post that the Obama proposal includes a provision that would require health policy makers to ask doctors to counsel elderly patients that they are better off dying than receiving care. President Obama's "murder grandma" proposal is obviously essential to his claim that the proposal will reduce health costs. While there may be gains from providing coverage to the uninsured because they can obtain earlier treatment, the expansion of coverage will also stimulate demand in the absence of rationing provisions. I have not read the bill, but there is no doubt in my mind that rationing is essential to cost reduction claims( if indeed costs are reduced, which will be a surprise to me given the widespread incompetence in Washington with respect to even the most elementary managerial problems).

I repeat. Would you please send me a clearly written letter (another concept that is generally alien to the inept Washington culture) outlining your answers to these three questions:

1. Has Congressman Maurice Hinchey read the Obama health care bill?

2. If not, does Congressman Hinchey believe that in voting for a bill that he has not read and does not understand that he is fulfilling his duties as a Congressman to his constituents?

3. What is Congressman Hinchey's position on rationing provisions in the bill, including the "murder-your-grandma" provision?
Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

Escalating Health Costs and Health Care Vouchers

The New York Sun reports that health care costs in New York and nationally are expected to rise by 8.7 percent, or roughly $700. The national cost per person is $7,982, while in New York it is $8,719 (the difference is probably due to the cost of parking in New York City). The Sun quotes the management consulting firm of Hewitt Associates to the effect that nationally employees will pay 21% of the cost, or $2,008 and employers will pay 79% of the cost.

I have previously blogged that the sum of current Medicaid; Medicare; tax expenditures on corporate plans; and state and federal employees' insurance would pay about 69% of the cost of health insurance for every person, including the uninsured, in the US. Thus, if instead of sponsoring inefficient plans like Medicaid and Medicare, and by combining all the federal and state governments' spending on all plans, including tax expenditures, Congress could create health care vouchers which Americans could use to purchase health insurance from private companies. In fact, the percentage would be higher than 69% of cost because of the large amount of waste and corruption in Medicaid and probably in the other government plans as well. This would require ending the corporate tax deduction for health insurance and replacing it with a blanket tax credit that would apply to all Americans. Those whose taxes are less than $8,719 would receive reverse income tax to cover the cost of health care. Taking government out of health care to a greater extent (by ending Medicaid, Medicare and government employee plans) would be a step toward deregulation of health care. If this were combined with increased incentives for globalization (receiving expensive operations in foreign countries like India where they cost 90 percent less) and limits on heroic end of life care which is in the area of 1/3 of all costs but does not produce life-extending outcomes (insurance for which could be purchased privately if wanted) and unnecessary operations, current government spending would likely cover health costs for all Americans, at as good a level as they receive now and probably better than other nations'.

The problem is not one that ought to involve spending money, but rather one that ought to overcome government bureaucrats, public health officials and health providers, all of whom have juicy "stakes" in arguing for more bureaucracy, more spending and ineffective care.

Thoughts on Health Reform

I don't think incremental reforms have worked as yet. Health care costs have gone up at fast rates in the past few years, and the uninsured problem has not gone away. The systemic problems of the past 40 years have gotten worse, not better. Employers are very unhappy. In other words, we are spending 50% more for health care than other countries with 1/6th of the public uninsured at any given point in time and with moratlity rates that are mediocre in comparison with other countries'. The highest costs in the world with poor results. Health care is where the auto industry was in 1972, and it's going to get worse.

Know one knows the the coming cost impact on health care of the aging baby boomers--no one can predict that. For sure, the inelasticity of demand for health care will magnify small increases in demand.

In addition, there is the problem of the employer retiree health insurance plans that are about to implode, which will be a surprise to many middle class baby boomers who have yet to experience paying 20% of their paychecks (or pension checks) for health insurance.

Oh, I'm sure all those retirees are going to love selling their second homes or not being able to vacation in Hawaii because health insurance costs here will be 75% higher than anywhere else in the world.

The health insurance industry is going to be real popular, sort of like John D. Rockefeller in 1932. The insurance industry needs to start thinking creatively, or the public is going to make it regret it.

The automobile industry learned that you can sell cars that last 60,000 miles and call them great, but sooner or later there are going to be cars that last 300,000 miles at the same price. I think that the insurance industry had better start coming up with some new ideas or they will suffer a parallel response. The real question is whether the response will continue on the present regulatory path, which may end private health insurance altogether, or more market-driven reforms will take the system in a better direction.

Globalizaton and Health Care Reform

In recent years there have been two parallel movements that suggest completely divergent directions for health care reform. The first, the status quo or various extensions of the status quo such as proposals for a single payer system, mandating employee coverage, mandating employer coverage, health spending accounts and similar Republican and Democratic proposals, are based on the assumption that the current, heavily regulated health care system only needs a few tweaks. The second direction is globalization, in other words a radically free market approach that tackles the fundamentally erroneous assumptions about the current regulation-based system. No major politician has proposed any free market-based approach to health care reform for several reasons.

First, as Howard Katz points out:

>"The advocates of socialized medicine have simply and dogmatically asserted, 'Health care is a right.' They never tried to argue for this. They never presented what they considered proofs. They simply assert it as self evident. This is because to them altruism is self evident. Altruism is morality.

>"I argue that free health care led to the Holocaust...

>"since the bypass operation does not help (and probably hurts) the patient, doing it at a lower cost is not a benefit. If you want to help heart patients, the easiest way is to let them take vitamin E. However, the medical profession is so hostile to vitamin E (because it is low cost and works superbly) that they have gotten the FDA to prevent truthful advertising by vitamin E manufacturers and wholesalers (in contradiction to the First Amendment)...

>"The FDA, by the way, is an excellent example of the failures of socialized medicine...There have been several cancer cures discovered over the course of the 20th century which have the ability to cure a large proportion of the cancers which are today fatal. But the FDA has banned or suppressed them."

Second, our health care system is the most expensive in the world, but our health outcomes are mediocre for the industrialized world. Our mortality rates are higher than Japan's, France's or Canada's, but our health care costs are at least 50 percent higher. There are a number of reasons for the fact that our costs are the highest in the world. We do have a first-world quality health system, but so do countries with lower mortality rates and lower costs, such as Japan, France and Canada.

There are a number of reasons for the higher costs here. These include:

1. Heroic end of life care. In many plans 1/3 of the total costs are due to a miniscule percentage of participants. It turns out that there is often no life extension benefit to this kind of care, which can cost a million dollars or more per case.

2. Costs of bureaucracy and control. I don't have a percentage, but it is more than a couple of percent. There are many examples, for instance, of hospitals that have hired entire departments to manage DRG systems mandated by state laws, Medicare and insurance companies.

3. Costs of unnecessary care; iatrogenic (physician-caused) illness. Again, it is difficult to pin down exact numbers, but Rand did a study in the 1980s where it showed the charts of recipients of cardiac bypass operations to Canadian physicians. A large percentage of the cardiac bypasses would not have been given in Canada. The same is true of other operations such as for prostate cancer and a number of other things. It is difficult to pin down exact numbers, but at $50,000 a pop, if a third of cardiac bypass operations are unnecessary the costs are staggering. Unnecessary hospitalization leads to complications, causing costs that simply would not have existed where unnecessary care is not given. I knew someone in college who died from administration of an anesthetic when she was in her early twenties. My wife's friend's mother was crippled for life in her 70s because of an improperly executed medical test. Unnecessary care leads to unncecessary iatrogenic illness.

4. Costs due to uncovered people who cannot get treatment who subsequently develop life threatening illness and hospitals must treat much more expensively than they would have if care were affordable.

5. Costs of unnecessary technology that small hospitals purchase to seem important and then charge patients to cover capital costs paid by third party payers. There are enough mammography machines in the US to give every woman two a year, but most women do not get one and it turns out that they give them breast cancer.

6. Lack of attention to wellness because people assume that all illness can be cured.

The problem with our health care system is over-regulation. Yet, all the Republican solutions and Democratic solutions involve extending or reshaping the regulation.

Why not sidestep regulation altogether?

This can be accomplished through overseas medical treatment. Globalization has resulted in lower costs in almost all fields with the exception of heavily regulated ones, such as higher education and health care, where people are unlikely to go overseas and globalization has proceeded most slowly.

That is about to change. Already, hundreds of thousands of people around the world travel to foreign countries for treatment. Medical tourism is already on offer by a range of apparently good-quality hospitals in India and elsewhere such as India Medical Tourism. There are also Thai, Phillipine providers, and a a number of other countries where treatment is available.

Back in the 1950s, many Americans believed that goods "made in Japan" were of low quality. As it turned out, by the 1970s "made in Japan" meant better quality than U.S.-manufactured goods. There is no reason why health care can't be provided in the third world. This would side-step the bloated, highly regulated and mediocre-quality US healthcare system. There are several reasons to believe that quality can be managed adequately now and improved over time to levels that surpass US levels of quality.

1. Although health care standards here are likely higher than in many third world countries now, there is no reason that they can't learn to do it better than we do. In the 1950s Japanese manufacturers were associated with low quality. Today, the quality of Japanese manufactured goods is the best in the world.

2. Many US physicians come from India anyway.

3. There are more Indians with intelligence in the top 25% of the American intelligence distribution than there are Americans.

4. The training here is not unique. We have no knowledge or abilities that can't be easily duplicated in Asia.

5. The problem here is the system, to include the regulation, the tax system, licensure and special interest pressure such as from the drug companies. There is no reason why health costs should be increasing faster than general inflation. Gains in outcomes in healthcare have been good, but no better than in other fields.

6. Most gains in mortality rates have not been due to the quality of health care. Rather, they have been due to public health and personal habits.

7. Health care here is of mediocre quality. Our mortality rates are around the mean for the developed world. Yet, we spend 50% more than other countries.

8. The costs trends are a product of the way we do it, the political arrangements, not the technology or quality of care.

9. As Howard Katz points out, many people here are avoiding the system altogether. You see a rapid growth of holistic treatments, homeopathy and the like because many people are increasingly convinced that going to the hospital will make them sicker.

In order to make globalization of health care work, payers have to work with providers to develop treaties whereby they can co-manage facilities with third world providers. Just as Wal-Mart and many other US corporations have gotten involved in managing factories in China and information technology facilities in India, so can health care providers, hospitals and HMOs get involved in co-managing facilities in the third world. These will offer tremendous economic opportunities to third world citizens. For example, there is no reason why US universities can't be encouraged to open medical schools in third world countries.

With co-management, the absence of burdensome healthcare regulation and government intervention, health care quality and standards in the third world can be elevated to a higher level than in the US. Also, there would be the elimination of the US tort system, which has amounted to a government scam on behalf of trial lawyers here.

Naturally, many object to the idea of care that avoids regulation. They are happy paying 50% more for mediocre mortality. They are happy with the conditions in the Walter Reed Medical Center. They believe that without regulation, quality is impossible.

These assumptions are false. Good quality medical care does not require government intervention. Rather, government intervention has reduced the quality of medical care.

Others believe that we already have a free market system. This is not so. Most health care costs are heavily influenced by government intervention. Tax incentives, subsidies, government programs and the like make our health care system almost an extension of the government. The fact that it has performed so poorly in comparison with other sectors of the economy suggests that government has failed.

The problem of health reform is one of education. Payers such as big corporations need to learn how to co-manage facilities overseas, or encourage their HMOs and insurance companies to do so.

If a significant percentage of American healthcare is globalized, costs will dramatically be reduced. Many unnecessary operations, such as cardiac bypass operations, will be eliminated because the current incentive structure will be dissipated. Care will become affordable so the problem of the uninsured will go away. The massive waste and mismanagement that characterizes the current system will start to be eliminated.