Uncommon Sense

politics and society are, unfortunately, much the same thing

Republican lawmakers slam ‘diversion’ of ObamaCare funds from Treasury

original article: Republican lawmakers slam ‘diversion’ of ObamaCare funds from Treasury
March 11, 2016 by FoxNews

Republican critics say an ObamaCare program is breaking the law by shorting the U.S. Treasury — and therefore U.S. taxpayers– billions of dollars collected from the insurance industry.

Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa., chairman of the health subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, called it “an illegal wealth transfer from hard-working taxpayers to (insurers).”

He recently joined Republican colleagues in grilling Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell about the shortfall of money  supposed to be flowing into Treasury coffers – as mandated in the Affordable Care Act of 2010.

They followed up that hearing by sending a letter this week seeking clarification from the administration, according to The Hill.

Under the law, money is collected each year from insurers for the ACA’s reinsurance program, which helps plans taking on higher costs associated with sicker enrollees.

While $10 billion was supposed to go back to the market to pay those costs in 2014, the first year, an additional $2 billion was supposed to go to the U.S. Treasury under the law. It never arrived.

That was because not enough money was brought in to cover both, so the administration prioritized. Then HHS published a new rule saying payments would be made to insurers first in the event of a shortfall.

The rule, set in 2014, was published publicly for comment and received no reaction at the time, Burwell told a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing when the matter was raised again by lawmakers last week.

According to health care law expert Tim Jost, a professor at Washington & Lee University School of Law, the reinsurance program is not permanent and was instituted as a way to shoulder some of the burden for the new costs connected with new, at-risk enrollees who weren’t able to get adequate coverage before ObamaCare.

The reinsurance program was to collect $10 billion from insurance companies in 2014, $6 billion in 2015, and $4 billion in 2016. The Treasury would get $2 billion in 2014 and 2015 and $1 billion in 2016.

In 2014, according to reports, only $9.7 billion was collected from the industry , and 2015 totals were expected to be short, as well.

Critics say the law is clear: the Treasury gets the money and it cannot be transferred elsewhere, even if that “elsewhere” is to the insurance companies for the reinsurance program.

According to The Hill, presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., teamed up with Sen. Orrin Hatch, R- Utah, to write a letter decrying the administration’s moves.

“The statute in question is unambiguous, and the HHS regulation and recent practice violates its clear directive,” the letter read.

Jost is not so sure. He says it all depends on how the mandate is interpreted. “(The administration’s) reading of the statute is, that the reason for adopting this program was to establish a reinsurance program, and therefore if there was a shortfall the money collected should first go to reinsurance,” and if more is collected, “only then would it go to the Treasury,” Jost told Foxnews.com. “(Republicans) say that reading is wrong.”

“It’s a disagreement on how to read the statute,” he added, “but I don’t think there is anything illegal, unconstitutional or immoral in respect to what the administration is doing.”

bureaucracy, congress, ethics, funding, government, health care, nanny state, politics, public policy, rationing, reform, regulation, spending

Advertisements

Filed under: bureaucracy, congress, ethics, funding, government, health care, nanny state, politics, public policy, rationing, reform, regulation, spending

Apparently there’s a big difference between union leadership and union workers

Indianapolis auto workers drive UAW executives out of meeting
August 17, 2010 by Andre Damon

Workers at a General Motors stamping plant in Indianapolis, Indiana chased United Auto Workers executives out of a union meeting Sunday, after the UAW demanded workers accept a contract that would cut their wages in half.

Now that the success of GM depends more directly on them, the UAW is acting like management.

capitalism, elitism, greed, protests, rationing, tragedy, unintended consequences, video

Filed under: capitalism, elitism, greed, protests, rationing, tragedy, unintended consequences, video

How Congress intends to cut health care costs

NYT: ObamaCare’s Success Based On Denying Medical Procedures
April 7, 2010 by Noel Sheppard

In today’s “Now They Tell Us” segment, the New York Times on Wednesday reported that ObamaCare’s ability to bring down costs will be a function of denying some people medical services and procedures.

“From an economic perspective, health reform will fail if we can’t sometimes push back against the try-anything instinct,” wrote David Leonhardt.

“So figuring out how we can say no may be the single toughest and most important task facing the people who will be in charge of carrying out reform.”

As you continue to read Leonhardt’s shocking words, consider that the paper he writes for has published over 100 articles about Sarah Palin’s “death panels”:

Democrats, budget, bureaucracy, congress, funding, government, health care, ideology, left wing, legislation, liberalism, marxism, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, politics, public policy, rationing, reform, regulation, socialism

Filed under: budget, bureaucracy, congress, Democrats, funding, government, health care, ideology, left wing, legislation, liberalism, marxism, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, politics, public policy, rationing, reform, regulation, socialism

What will Obamacare cost states?

The True Price of Reform
April 1, 2010 by Fox News, Glenn Beck Program

The health care bill is paid in party by a $500 Billion cut in Medicare funding just when 30% more people will enroll in Medicare when they turn 65.

In the first 2 years of the new health care bill there will be cuts to Medicare dialysis, Medicare home care, Medicare hospice care, Medicare reimbursements to hospitals and nursing homes.

There will be less care for people, and there will be shortages, and ultimately there won’t be enough money, and so they’ll have to ration the care for everyone.

We are going to insure healthy 20 year-olds at the expense of the elderly.

Cuts in Medicare reimbursement is so severe that some hospitals will simply stop taking Medicare.

budget, bureaucracy, entitlements, funding, government, health care, legislation, medicine, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, politics, public policy, rationing, regulation, unintended consequences

Filed under: budget, bureaucracy, entitlements, funding, government, health care, legislation, medicine, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, politics, public policy, rationing, regulation, unintended consequences

Health Reform May Lead to Significant Reduction in Physician Workforce

The Medicus Firm Physician Survey: Health Reform May Lead to Significant Reduction in Physician Workforce
January 2010, by Andrea Santiago

What if nearly half of all physicians in America stopped practicing medicine? While a sudden loss of half of the nations physicians seems unlikely, a very dramatic decrease in the physician workforce could become a reality as an unexpected side effect of health reform.

health care, medicine, nanny state, politics, public policy, rationing, reform, study, tragedy, unintended consequences

Filed under: health care, medicine, nanny state, politics, public policy, rationing, reform, study, tragedy, unintended consequences

Retirement Benefits: What to Expect in 2010

Retirement Benefits: What to Expect in 2010
December 21, 2009 by Emily Brandon

In most years, retirement benefits
increase to keep up with inflation. But 2010 will be far from typical. Because of a drop in the consumer price index, government payouts and tax incentives to save for retirement will generally stay the same. At the same time, out-of-pocket retiree health costs, especially for prescription drugs, will continue their steady climb. Here’s a look at what will happen to retirement benefits in 2010.

In most election cycles Democrats accuse Republicans of wanting to cut Medicare and Medicaid, to scare seniors into voting Democrat. With no Republican power to oppose their agenda, Democrats “cut” Medicare all on their own. In case you don’t know, in Washington-ease, increasing funding for a government program by only 2% instead of 6% is called a “cut” when Republicans are in charge. By that standard, increasing Medicare benefits by 0% instead of the usual annual increase should also be called a cut.

After reading your article stating premium increase for Part D by 11% for 2010, I felt pretty good. However, when we received and opened the notification from social security for 2010, I was shocked. If this continues to go up over 50% each year, none of us will be able to afford insurance.

I called Medicare regarding the cost and was just told yes it states $78.00. I asked where in the 2010 manual does it stated that Part D went up over 50%. We do not have Cadillac plans. Social security representative didn’t know what to say.

Democrats, economics, economy, entitlements, funding, government, health care, hypocrisy, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, philosophy, political correctness, politics, public policy, rationing, regulation, socialism, spending

Filed under: Democrats, economics, economy, entitlements, funding, government, health care, hypocrisy, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, philosophy, political correctness, politics, public policy, rationing, regulation, socialism, spending

Budget woes leading to cuts in free cancer screenings for women in some states

Budget woes leading to cuts in free cancer screenings for women in some states
December 12, 2009 by VALERIE BAUMAN

ALBANY, N.Y. — As the economy falters and more people go without health insurance, low-income women in at least 20 states are being turned away or put on long waiting lists for free cancer screenings, according to the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network.

In the unofficial survey of programs for July 2008 through April 2009, the organization found that state budget strains are forcing some programs to reject people who would otherwise qualify for free mammograms and Pap tests. Just how many are turned away isn’t known.

“I cried and I panicked,” said Erin LaBarge, 47. This would have been her third year receiving a free mammogram through the screening program in St. Lawrence County in New York.

New York used to screen women of all ages but this year is excluding women under 50.

The Cancer Society has no way to count how many women are being turned away, and many providers don’t keep track of how many are denied screening or whether they find an alternative. The cost of screening varies, but the average mammogram is about $100, a Pap test $75 to $200, according to the society.

budget, crisis, economics, economy, funding, government, health care, medicine, nanny state, news, public policy, rationing, scandal, socialism, spending, tragedy

Filed under: budget, crisis, economics, economy, funding, government, health care, medicine, nanny state, news, public policy, rationing, scandal, socialism, spending, tragedy

PR campaign against using health care you already have

Radiation from CT scans linked to cancers, deaths
December 15, 2009 by Liz Szabo, USA TODAY

First it was breast cancer and mammograms, then it was prostate cancer screenings, now a story designed to make you fear CT scans. This series of stories (and expect more in the near future) is designed to establish a precedent for reducing health care usage. With this mentality in place we the people should be less likely to revolt when massive rationing of health care occurs in a soon to be government-run health care system.
First breast cancer, now prostate cancer

bias, campaign, crisis, entitlements, health care, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, medicine, nanny state, news media, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, rationing, relativism

Filed under: bias, campaign, crisis, entitlements, health care, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, medicine, nanny state, news media, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, rationing, relativism

Health care loophole would allow coverage limits

Anyone really think this health care legislation is going to help the American people?

Health care loophole would allow coverage limits
December 11, 2009 by RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR

WASHINGTON (AP) – A loophole in the Senate health care bill would let insurance companies place annual dollar limits on medical care for people struggling with costly illnesses such as cancer.

Adding to the confusion, the language is tucked away in a clause of the bill captioned “No lifetime or annual limits.” Advocates for patients say it fails to deliver on that promise.

“The primary purpose of insurance is to protect people against catastrophic loss,” said Stephen Finan, a policy expert with the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network. “If you put a limit on benefits, by definition it’s going to affect people who are dealing with catastrophic loss.”

Democrats, bureaucracy, congress, economics, economy, funding, government, health care, ideology, left wing, legislation, liberalism, nanny state, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, politics, rationing, scandal, unintended consequences

Filed under: bureaucracy, congress, Democrats, economics, economy, funding, government, health care, ideology, left wing, legislation, liberalism, nanny state, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, politics, rationing, scandal, unintended consequences

First breast cancer, now prostate cancer

Many Prostate Cancers Caught by Screening Won’t Kill
December 4, 2009 by Anne Harding

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – The number of prostate cancers diagnosed in UK men each year would jump from 30,000 to 160,000 if the country introduced population-wide screening for the disease, new research shows. However, many of those cancers are low-risk and may not lead to death.

Something similar happened in the United States in the mid-1990s, when giving men prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood tests to detect the disease became standard practice, Professor David E. Neal of the University of Cambridge, one of the new study’s authors, told Reuters Health.

Remember those other recent news stories designed to make you think frequent cancer examinations aren’t really necessary? These are all efforts to build support for a government-run health care agenda and to assuage fears about health care rationing.

Think you know everything about breast cancer?

Now recommendations for cervical cancer screenings reduced

Mammography outcry points to trouble for healthcare reform

Healthcare bills could jeopardize states’ consumer protection laws

bias, funding, government, health, health care, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, medicine, nanny state, news, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, rationing, reform, relativism

Filed under: bias, funding, government, health, health care, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, medicine, nanny state, news, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, rationing, reform, relativism

Pages

Categories

October 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031