Universal Health Care for America

[Guest LAW]

Gaggle by Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton aboard Air Force One en route Willow Grove, Pennsylvania, 3/8/10

 

Aboard Air Force One

En Route Willow Grove, Pennsylvania

 

Q Okay. And then on health care, he's been talking a lot about the premiums. Is that the main focus now, is how it affects people and their premiums? Or is he going to move to a different topic on Wednesday, a different aspect of this?

 

MR. BURTON: You'll see the President talk about a lot of the different aspects of this issue. It's a problem for Americans for a variety of issues -- from the rising cost of premiums, to the fact that people are getting priced out of health care, to the insurance reforms that are so desperately needed because people with preexisting conditions can't get health insurance, people who get sick are getting kicked off their health insurance. So you'll see the President talk about some of the different elements.

 

This Goldman report obviously brings a real illustration of the kinds of business decisions that are being made that are really hurting the American people.

[Guest LAW]

In a statement on Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also referenced the Goldman Sachs conference call. “In fact, Goldman Sachs is recommending that investors buy shares in two big insurance companies – the UnitedHealth Group and Cigna – because the potential for profit is high,” Speaker Pelosi said.

[Guest Human]

I will wait till the vote. The only thing certian is that if the democrats choose to go at it alone, then that's their choice.

 

Right now I will wait and see.

[Guest Human]

It comes down to a simple question; Do they Represent the American people?

By and for the government,or by and for the People.

 

Which one are the democrats for?

[Guest Ricardo Ramirez]

For Hispanics, health reform can't wait. One out of every three Hispanics under 65 lacks health insurance, 80 percent of Latinos stand to benefit from reform, and all Americans will benefit once insurance companies are held accountable: no more skyrocketing prices that the middle class can't afford, no more denied coverage for preexisting conditions, and families will be able to keep their children on their policies until the age of 26.

 

But with Republicans siding with the insurance companies and the status quo, the stakes are too high for Latinos. President Obama has taken the fight for reform further than any other president in history, and we will not give up the fight for reform that will be so helpful for Latino families, who are disproportionately affected by our broken health care system. Watch Governor Kaine's message here:

 

 

Transcript:

 

Hello, everybody. Last week the President laid out the way forward on health insurance reform and called on Congress to act quickly to pass historic and long overdue reforms to our country's health insurance system.

 

Almost a year has passed since we began this process. Another year that families suffered under back-breaking health insurance costs, another year in which insurance companies made decisions based on their bottom lines rather than your health and another year in which millions of have gone with no insurance at all.

 

For our Latino community, reform is especially urgent. One in every three Latinos does not have health insurance. And 80 percent will see immediate benefits from reform.

 

This is why last week the President made clear what many of you know all too well: we cannot delay any longer. The final march for reform has begun.

 

And the President's proposal charts the path to real reform.

 

First, the President's plan would hold insurance companies accountable and institute new protections to prevent insurance companies from denying you coverage, arbitrarily raising your premiums or charging you exorbitant fees. The President's reforms will put an end to the worst practices of the insurance industry.

 

Second, it will offer small businesses and those who cannot get insurance coverage through your employers the same access to quality health care that Members of Congress receive. And for those who still can't afford insurance, the plan will offer tax credits to help you pay for coverage.

 

Third, this plan will reduce the cost of health care for millions and extend the life of Medicare by rooting out waste and abuse in the system. Medicare patients will get better care, with fewer errors and American families, business and state governments will spend fewer dollars on health care.

 

But, despite the fact that reform is so obvious to us, powerful interests are arrayed against it – from insurance company lobbyists to Republicans in Congress. And though the President's plan draws from the best ideas of both parties, Republicans continue to say no. Why? Because Republicans simply don't want to hold health insurance companies accountable and force them to end their most abusive practices.

 

Like denying people coverage due to a pre-existing condition and jacking up premiums for 20, 30 and 40 percent on families and small businesses. We see it differently. We believe insurance companies should be held accountable and that doctors and their patients should be in charge of medical decisions – not the bean counters at the insurance companies.

 

Just like you, I've heard countless stories – many of them heart-breaking – about the need for health insurance reform. That's why I am calling on all of you to once more pick up the phone, knock on your neighbor's door, and demand the changes to our health insurance system that you deserve. With your help, we can ensure that quality, affordable health care is available now and for generations to come.

[Guest Responsible Health Care]

Americans for Responsible Health Care (ARHC) launched a seven-state radio ad campaign today calling on Democrat Members of Congress to listen to the American people's opposition to ObamaCare, and to vote against the government takeover of the nation's health care.

 

The ads -- now running in Arizona, Indiana, Nevada, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia -- point out that Representatives Gabrielle Giffords, Baron Hill, Dina Titus, Zack Space, John Spratt, Tom Perriello and Nick Rahall already voted for ObamaCare once.

 

The ads go on to warn that if these Members of Congress continue to vote against the will of the people and with the elite liberal establishment in Washington yet again, they will, and they deserve to, lose this November.

 

Americans for Responsible Health Care Spokesman Jeff Cohen said:

 

"The majority of the American people oppose ObamaCare. The question is, will these Members of Congress listen to the people or will they continue to side with the elite Washington insiders and their astonishingly liberal plans for the government to takeover and control our healthcare?"

 

"It's really quite simple -- if these Members of Congress vote against the people again, then the people will undoubtedly return the favor in kind come November."

 

This seven state radio campaign by Americans for Responsible Health Care follows the organization's successful independent expenditure in January's Massachusetts special election on behalf of Scott Brown (who was elected to the United States Senate), and a seven state print advertising campaign that targeted U.S. Senators Harry Reid, Arlen Specter, Blanche Lincoln, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Barbara Boxer.

 

Paid for by Americans for Responsible Health Care.

[Guest greenzen]

My question is why does the government need taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. They are already covered by medicaid and major insurance carriers. This does not benefit my welfare.

 

American Women's Services offers abortion services from very early gestation to 24 weeks LMP (from the last menstrual period) and referrals for abortion services from 24 to 36 weeks. If you are nine weeks or less from your last normal period, you will have the option of choosing either a non-surgical or a surgical abortion. If you are between nine and fourteen weeks pregnant, the surgical option will be available to you with either local anesthesia or twilight sleep sedation. If your pregnancy is between fourteen and twenty-four weeks, a second trimester surgical procedure can be performed. Please see our pregnancy calculator to estimate the gestation of your pregnancy. Our services are completely confidential and our mission is to provide you with the best compassionate, individualized care. We strive to make your experience as private, comfortable, affordable, and positive as possible.

 

As part of our services, all necessary laboratory testing, physical examination and ultrasound will be performed to evaluate your condition and the gestational age of your pregnancy. As our patient, you will receive individual options counseling, detailed information on the procedures available to you, and time to discuss your feelings. During each step of your appointment, you will be supported by our experienced, compassionate, friendly staff. For more information, please visit our Frequently Asked Questions page or call the office most convenient to you.

 

You can call us toll-free, at 1-888-ABORTION , 24 hours a day to speak with one of our professionals who can answer your questions and make an appointment for you.

 

We accept most insurance plans & HMOs including, but not limited to, Aetna, Anthem, AmeriHealth, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, CareFirst, Cigna, Great-West, Keystone East, NJ Medicaid, National Capital PPO, Oxford Freedom Plan, UniCare, and United Healthcare.

 

 

http://www.americanwomensservices.com/abortion.php

[Guest Susanna]

Mitt Romney's role in overseeing passage of a universal health care plan in Massachusetts appears likely to cause headaches for the former Republican governor should he make his widely expected run for the White House in 2012," Montopoli writes. He notes that other commentators are drawing attention to the fact that "all of the government-subsidized health care plans offered to low-income Massachusetts residents, under a program called Commonwealth Care, cover abortion." David Axelrod, a White House senior adviser, has called the Massachusetts health insurance law the "template" for Obama's reform plans. Montopoli writes, "All this appears to leave Romney on the wrong side of the issue." In response to criticism over the abortion issue, Romney spokesperson Eric Fehrnstrom said, "Court rulings in Massachusetts require state-subsidized health plans to offer abortion services. It's not something that Gov. Romney agrees with, but it's longstanding court precedent that predates his administration" (Montopoli, "Political Hotsheet," CBS News, 3/8).

[Guest Jivin J]

 

Translation: "Abortion for Polish women introduced by Hitler on March 9, 1943."

 

Until 1932, abortion was banned in Poland without exceptions. In thatyear a new Penal Code legalized abortion strictly when there weremedical reasons and, for the 1st time in Europe, when the pregnancyresulted from a criminal act. Except during the German occupation in WWII, his law was in effect from 1932 to 1956.

[Guest Jivin J]

Abortion was used as a weapon of mass destruction in Eastern Europe. In 1942, together with his personal physician Dr. Karl Brandt and secretary Martin Borman, Hitler issued one of

the most extreme policy statements of the Nazi regime:

 

In view of the large families of the Slav native population, it could only suit us if girls and

women there had as many abortions as possible. We are not interested in seeing the non-German

population multiply…We must use every means to install in the population the idea that it is harmful to have several children, the expenses that they cause and the dangerous effect on woman’s

health… It will be necessary to open special institutions for abortions and doctors must be able

to help out there in case there is any question of this being a breach of their professional ethics.

 

Poliakov L. Harvest of Hate. New York: Syracuse, 1954:272–4.

[Guest Soldier of God]

Faithful Catholics we must not miss the chance to invoke the intercession of the second most important saint, St. Joseph, considering that his feast day coincides with the voting schedule, and that he is the patron saint of families.

[Guest greenzen]

Voting for the Senate bill means voting for the Cornhusker kickback and the Louisiana purchase — the price Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid paid for the votes of Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu. It's not hard to imagine the ads Republicans could run attacking House members for sending money to Nebraska and Louisiana but not their home states.

[Guest LAW]

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/03/10/Pelosi-suggests-Dems-have-healthcare-votes/UPI-78481268270796/

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., suggested in an interview House Democrats have enough votes to approve healthcare legislation "if we took it up today."

 

In an interview conducted Tuesday, PBS talk show host Charlie Rose asked Pelosi whether the House would approve a Senate-passed bill if it came up for a vote this week.

 

"Yes," she said. "If we took it up today, yes."

 

Pelosi said it would not be clear when a vote might be held because final legislative language has not been agreed on, and the Congressional Budget Office has not reported on its score of the legislation's fiscal impact, The Hill reported.

 

House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., suggested the CBO report could be issued Wednesday or Thursday, but he told CNBC Wednesday it wasn't clear the Democrats have locked up enough votes for passage.

 

"I think we can see the votes from here," Miller said. "As the Speaker says, we'll have the votes when we take up the bill."

 

The White House has said it wants the vote to come before March 18, when President Barack Obama is scheduled to leave Washington for an overseas trip.

 

Pelosi's interview with Rose was scheduled to air Wednesday night.

[Guest ALWAYSRED]

No sooner had Rep Jim Matheson (D-Utah) suggested that he might be willing to switch his vote and support the latest version of ObamaCare than his brother was nominated for a federal judgeship.

 

Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) is also on the undecided list. And, purely by coincidence no doubt, the Justice Department just announced that it is dropping an FBI investigation that has been swirling about the congressman. Gosh, if only Charlie Rangel were one of the undecideds.

 

Those who oppose the president can expect the political equivalent of a horse head between their sheets.

 

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/final_reform_push_0pwRMzHMNshlHQZg8LWmcJ#ixzz0hpVAlnsz

[Guest valdrith21]

This classic video, composed by Future Animators of the Future, is almost impossible to find any more. I'm uploading it here for my own archival purposes as I suspect this hard drive is about to die.. but I *suppose* you can enjoy it if you're already here.

[Guest Black Genocide]

Minority women constitute only about 13% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they underwent approximately 36% of the abortions.

 

According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, black women are more than 5 times as likely as white women to have an abortion

 

On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.

 

This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions. Michael Novak had calculated "Since the number of current living Blacks (in the U.S.) is 36 million, the missing 16 million represents an enormous loss, for without abortion, America's Black community would now number 52 million persons. It would be 36 percent larger than it is. Abortion has swept through the Black community like a scythe, cutting down every fourth member."

 

A highly significant 1993 Howard University study showed that African American women over age 50 were 4.7 times more likely to get breast cancer if they had had any abortions compared to women who had not had any abortions.

[Guest Zion]

Planned Parenthood was founded by, Margaret Sanger, a racist who advocated selective breeding of African Americans.

 

 

Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, a social philosophy which claims that human hereditary traits can be improved through social intervention. Sanger's eugenic policies ran to an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family-planning autonomy for the able-minded, and segregation or sterilization for the profoundly retarded. She expressly denounced euthanasia as a eugenics tool.

 

In A Plan for Peace (1932), for example, Sanger proposed a congressional department to:

 

Keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.

 

And, following:

 

Apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

 

Sanger saw birth control as a means to prevent "dysgenic" children from being born into a disadvantaged life, and dismissed "positive eugenics" (which promoted greater fertility for the "fitter" upper classes) as impractical. Though many leaders in the negative eugenics movement were calling for active euthanasia of the "unfit," Sanger spoke out against such methods. She believed that women with the power and knowledge of birth control were in the best position to produce "fit" children. She rejected any type of eugenics that would take control out of the hands of those actually giving birth.

 

Taking sharp issue in plain words with certain other eugenicists, however, Margaret Sanger completely rejected the idea of gassing the unfit. 'Nor do we believe,' wrote Sanger in Pivot of Civilization, 'that the community could or should send to the lethal chamber the defective progeny resulting from irresponsible and unintelligent breeding.'

 

Her first pamphlet read:

 

It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization. For upon the foundation of an enlightened and voluntary motherhood shall a future civilization emerge.

[Guest Fletcher Armstrong]

Center For Bio-Ethical Reform will resume its operation of billboard trucks in the congressional district of Rep. Chris Carney (D-PA) a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, beginning immediately and ending with the vote on the final version of the health care reform legislation currently making its way through both houses of Congress.

 

Trucks will display large abortion photos in a campaign to remind voters that abortion is not health care and consequently should not be federally funded as an element of health care reform, either directly or indirectly. A sample sign may be seen below:

 

We thank Rep. Carney for opposing abortion funding through government subsidized health insurance policies that would launder government money through an insured’s personal checking account to create the misleading impression that public funds have thereby been transformed into private premiums. We urge him to persist in his opposition.

[Guest GOP]

The Senate Republican leadership announced Wednesday that all 41 Senate Republicans signed a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, notifying him that they would not allow any violations of the Byrd Rule to be waived if Democrats insisted on using the budget reconciliation process to ram through the partisan health spending bill. The letter notes that this unity ensures that “any provision that trips the Byrd Rule will be stripped from the bill,” requiring “that the bill be sent back to the House for further consideration and additional votes.”

 

The full text of the letter follows:

 

March 4, 2010

 

The Honorable Harry Reid

 

Majority Leader

 

United States Senate

 

S-221 Capitol Building

 

Washington, D.C. 20510-0001

 

 

 

Dear Leader Reid:

 

We understand from press reports and comments that you and the Speaker have made that the House and Senate will use the budget reconciliation process to overhaul our nation’s health care system, which represents 1/6th of our economy. We urge you to not use reconciliation to pass a partisan bill that is opposed by the majority of Americans.

 

The American people have been paying close attention to the health reform debate; they understand the issues being discussed and they have expressed broad opposition not only to the substance of the health reform bills, but also to the process by which those bills have been developed. According to a February 24 CNN poll, 73 percent of Americans believe Congress should either start over on an “entirely new bill” or not do health care reform at all this year. A Gallup survey released February 25 showed that the majority of Americans oppose using reconciliation to expedite passage of health reform legislation through the Senate.

 

Overhauling our health care system will affect every single American and is simply too important to be passed without broad bipartisan support. Yet, it is clear that the only reason you are considering using the budget reconciliation process to pass this unpopular bill is because you have not been able to attract any Republican support for your comprehensive health bill.

 

We recommend you rethink your plans of expediting such legislation through Congress over the strong objections of the American people. We urge you to listen to the advice of Senator Robert C. Byrd, who was quoted in the Washington Post on March 22, 2009:

 

I am certain that putting health-care reform and climate change legislation on a freight train through Congress is an outrage that must be resisted.

 

Using the reconciliation process to enact major legislation prevents an open debate about critical issues in full view of the public. Health reform and climate change are issues that, in one way or another, touch every American family. Their resolution carries serious economic and emotional consequences.

 

The misuse of the arcane process of reconciliation -- a process intended for deficit reduction -- to enact substantive policy changes is an undemocratic disservice to our people and to the Senate's institutional role.

 

We agree with this assessment—misusing the Senate rules in this way would be a tremendous “disservice” to the American people and it is “an outrage” that we should resist.

 

In that regard, to endeavor to ensure that the reconciliation process is not used to fast-track an unpopular bill through Congress, we wish to inform you that we will oppose efforts to waive the so-called Byrd Rule during Senate consideration of any reconciliation bill concerning health reform. The Byrd Rule, as you know, was created by Senator Byrd to ensure that reconciliation bills were not used to enact policy changes, the primary purpose of which is not specifically related to the federal budget. As it takes 60 votes to waive the Byrd Rule, we can ensure that any provision that trips the Byrd Rule will be stripped from the bill, which will require that the bill be sent back to the House for further consideration and additional votes.

 

We urge you to abandon the use of reconciliation to pass a partisan bill that is opposed by the vast majority of Americans. Instead, we encourage you to work with us on a series of bipartisan bills that provide a step-by-step approach to reducing the cost of health care for Americans.

[Guest Carter]

SUMMARY OF THE BYRD RULE

 

Under the Byrd rule, the Senate is prohibited from considering extraneous matter as part of a reconciliation bill or resolution or conference report thereon.The definition of what constitutes "extraneous matter"is set forth in the Budget Act; however, the term remains subject to considerable interpretation by the presiding officer (who relieson the Senate Parliamentarian). The Byrd rule is enforced when a Senator raises a point of order during consideration of a reconciliation bill or conference report. If the point of order is sustained,the offending title, provision or amendment is deemed stricken unless its proponent can muster a 3/5 (60) Senate majority vote to waive the rule.

 

Subject matter - The Byrd rule may be invoked only against reconciliation bills, amendmentst hereto, and reconciliation conference reports.

 

Byrd rule tests - Section313( b )(1) of the Congressional Budget Act sets forth six testsfor matters to be considered extraneous under the Byrd rule.The criteria apply to provisions that:

 

• do not produce a change inoutlays or revenues;

• produce changes in outlays or revenue which are merely incidental to the non-budgetary components of the provision;

• are outside the jurisdiction of the committee that submitted the title or provision for inclusion in the reconciliation measure;

• increase outlays or decrease revenue if the provision's title, as a whole, fails to achieve the Senate reporting committee's reconciliation instructions;

• increase net outlays or decrease revenue during a fiscal year after the years covered by the reconciliation bill unless the provision's title, as a whole, remains budget neutral;

• contain recommendations regardingthe OASDI (social security) trust funds.

Exceptions to the Byrd Rule- Section 313( b )(2)allows certain otherwise covered Senate-originated provisions to be excepted from the Byrd rule if the provisions are certified for exemption by the Senate Budget Committee chairman and ranking minority member, as well as the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee of jurisdiction. The permitted exceptions are:

 

• a provision that mitigates direct effects attributable to a second provision which changes outlays or revenue when the provisions together produce a net reduction in outlays;

• the provision will result in a substantial reduction in outlays or a substantial increase in revenues during fiscal years after the fiscal years covered by the reconciliation bill;

• the provision will likely reduce outlays or increase revenues based on actions that are not currently projected by CBO for score keeping purposes; or

• such provision will likely produce significant reduction in outlays or increase in revenues,but due to insufficient data such reduction or increase cannotbe reliably estimated.

Effect of points of order -The effect of raisinga point of order under the Byrd rule is to strike the offending extraneous provision. If a point of order against a conference report is sustained, the Senate may consider subsequent motions to dispose of that portion of the conference report not subject to the point of order.

 

 

Waivers - TheByrd rule is not self-enforcing. A point of order must be raised at the appropriate time to enforce it. The Byrd rule can only be waived by a 3/5 (60) majority vote of the Senate.

[Guest roy]

Policies to Crack Down on Waste, Fraud and Abuse

 

The House and Senate health reform bills contain an unprecedented array of aggressive new authorities to fight waste, fraud and abuse. The President’s Proposal builds on those provisions by incorporating a number of additional proposals that are either part of the Administration’s FY 2011 Budget Proposal or were included in Republican plans.

Comprehensive Sanctions Database.

 

The President’s Proposal establishes a comprehensive Medicare and Medicaid sanctions database, overseen by the HHS Inspector General. This database will provide a central storage location, allowing for law enforcement access to information related to past sanctions on health care providers, suppliers and related entities. (Source: H.R. 3400, “Empowering Patients First Act” (Republican Study Committee bill))

Registration and Background Checks of Billing Agencies and Individuals.

 

In an effort to decrease dishonest billing practices in the Medicare program, the President’s Proposal will assist in reducing the number of individuals and agencies with a history of fraudulent activities participating in Federal health care programs. It ensures that entities that bill for Medicare on behalf of providers are in good standing. It also strengthens the Secretary’s ability to exclude from Medicare individuals who knowingly submit false or fraudulent claims. (Source: H.R. 3970, “Medical Rights & Reform Act” ( Kirk bill))

Expanded Access to the Healthcare Integrity and Protection Data Bank.

 

Increasing access to the health care integrity data bank will improve coordination and information sharing in anti-fraud efforts. The President’s Proposal broadens access to the data bank to quality control and peer review organizations and private plans that are involved in furnishing items or services reimbursed by Federal health care program. It includes criminal penalties for misuse. (Source: H.R. 3970, “Medical Rights & Reform Act” (Kirk bill))

Liability of Medicare Administrative Contractors for Claims Submitted by Excluded Providers.

 

In attacking fraud, it is critical to ensure the contractors that are paying claims are doing their utmost to ensure excluded providers do not receive Medicare payments. Therefore, the President’s Proposal provision holds Medicare Administrative Contractors accountable for Federal payment for individuals or entities excluded from the Federal programs or items or services for which payment is denied. (Source: H.R. 3970, “Medical Rights & Reform Act” (Kirk bill))

Community Mental Health Centers.

 

The President’s Proposal ensures that individuals have access to comprehensive mental health services in the community setting, but strengthens standards for facilities that seek reimbursement as community mental health centers by ensuring these facilities are not taking advantage of Medicare patients or the taxpayers. (Source: H.R. 3970, “Medical Rights & Reform Act” (Kirk bill))

Limiting Debt Discharge in Bankruptcies of Fraudulent Health Care Providers or Suppliers.

 

The President’s Proposal will assist in recovering overpayments made to providers and suppliers and return such funds to the Medicare Trust Fund. It prevents fraudulent health care providers from discharging through bankruptcy amounts due to the Secretary from overpayments. (Source: H.R. 3970, “Medical Rights & Reform Act” (Kirk bill))

Use of Technology for Real-Time Data Review.

 

The President’s Proposal speeds access to claims data to identify potentially fraudulent payments more quickly. It establishes a system for using technology to provide real-time data analysis of claim and payments under public programs to identify and stop waste, fraud and abuse. (Source: Roskam Amendment offered in House Ways & Means Committee markup)

Illegal Distribution of a Medicare or Medicaid Beneficiary Identification or Billing Privileges.

 

Fraudulent billing to Medicare and Medicaid programs costs taxpayers millions of dollars each year. Individuals looking to gain access to a beneficiary’s personal information approach Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries with false incentives. Many beneficiaries unwittingly give over this personal information without ever receiving promised services. The President’s Proposal adds strong sanctions, including jail time, for individuals who purchase, sell or distribute Medicare beneficiary identification numbers or billing privileges under Medicare or Medicaid – if done knowingly, intentionally, and with intent to defraud. (Source: H.R. 3970, “Medical Rights & Reform Act” (Kirk bill))

Study of Universal Product Numbers Claims Forms for Selected Items and Services under the Medicare Program.

 

The President’s Proposal requires HHS to study and issue a report to Congress that examines the costs and benefits of assigning universal product numbers (UPNs) to selected items and services reimbursed under Medicare. The report must examine whether UPNs could help improve the efficient operation of Medicare and its ability to detect fraud and abuse. (Source: H.R. 3970, “Medical Rights & Reform Act” (Kirk bill), Roskam Amendment offered in House Ways & Means Committee markup)

Medicaid Prescription Drug Profiling.

 

The President’s Proposal requires States to monitor and remediate high-risk billing activity, not limited to prescription drug classes involving a high volume of claims, to improve Medicaid integrity and beneficiary quality of care. States may choose one or more drug classes and must develop or review and update their care plan to reduce utilization and remediate any preventable episodes of care where possible. Requiring States to monitor high-risk billing activity to identify prescribing and utilization patterns that may indicate abuse or excessive prescription drug utilization will assist in improving Medicaid program integrity and save taxpayer dollars. (Source: President’s FY 2011 Budget)

Medicare Advantage Risk Adjustment Errors.

 

The President’s Proposal requires in statute that the HHS Secretary extrapolate the error rate found in the risk adjustment data validation (RADV) audits to the entire Medicare Advantage contract payment for a given year when recouping overpayments. Extrapolating risk score errors in MA plans is consistent with the methodology used in the Medicare fee-for-service program and enables Medicare to recover risk adjustment overpayments. MA plans have an incentive to report more severe beneficiary diagnoses than are justified because they receive higher payments for higher risk scores. (Source: President’s FY 2011 Budget)

Modify Certain Medicare Medical Review Limitations.

 

The Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 placed certain limitations on the type of review that could be conducted by Medicare Administrative Contractors prior to the payment of Medicare Part A and B claims. The President’s Proposal modifies these statutory provisions that currently limit random medical review and place statutory limitations on the application of Medicare prepayment review. Modifying certain medical review limitations will give Medicare contractors better and more efficient access to medical records and claims, which helps to reduce waste, fraud and abuse. (Source: President’s FY 2011 Budget)

Establish a CMS-IRS Data Match to Identify Fraudulent Providers.

 

The President’s Proposal authorizes the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to work collaboratively with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to determine which providers have seriously delinquent tax debt to help identify potentially fraudulent providers sooner. The data match will primarily target certain high-risk provider types in high-vulnerability areas. This proposal also enables both IRS and Medicare to recoup any monies owed to the Federal government through this program. By requiring the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to disclose to CMS those entities that have evaded filing taxes and matching the data against provider billing data, this proposal will enable CMS to better detect fraudulent providers billing the Medicare program. (Source: President’s FY 2011 Budget)

Preventing Delays in Access to Generic Drugs.

 

Currently, brand-name pharmaceutical companies can delay generic competition through agreements whereby they pay the generic company to keep its drug off the market for a period of time, called “pay-for-delay.” This hurts consumers by delaying their access to generic drugs, which are usually less expensive than their branded counterparts. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently estimated that this could cost consumers $35 billion over 10 years. The President’s proposal adopts a provision from the bipartisan legislation that gives the FTC enforcement authority to address this problem. Specifically, it makes anti-competitive and unlawful any agreement in which a generic drug manufacturer receives anything of value from a brand-name drug manufacturer that contains a provision in which the generic drug manufacturer agrees to limit or forego research, development, marketing, manufacturing or sales of the generic drug. This presumption can only be overcome if the parties to such an agreement demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the pro-competitive benefits of the agreement outweigh the anti-competitive effects of the agreement. The proposal also requires the Chief Executive Officer of the branded pharmaceutical company to certify to the accuracy and completeness of any agreements required to be filed with the FTC.

[Guest GOP]

The twisted scheme by which Democratic leaders plan to bend the rules to ram President Obama’s massive health care legislation through Congress now has a name: the Slaughter Solution.

 

The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill. You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House. Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House - without an actual vote by members of the House.

 

Senate Majority Whip Durbin said Democrats have asked Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin for information on how reconciliation can be used "with our goals" and what "the basic rules are."

Durbin said Democrats want to know how long the amendment process can go on. Republicans want to offer points of order that require 60 votes to overcome under the so-called Byrd rule. Democrats want points of order limited and straight majority votes. It will be up to the parliamentarian to rule what is subject to the Byrd rule and Democrats, Durbin indicated, are looking for guidance on how he views those questions.

 

Rep. Dale Kildee, D-Mich., who some considered a potential "no" vote based on the Senate abortion language, dispelled the notion Tuesday.

 

"I'll probably vote for the [senate] bill," Kildee said. "I think the Senate language maintains the principles of the Hyde amendment."

 

http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/CD_03-10-10_Slaughter_Preps_Rule_To_Avoid_Direct_Vote_On_Senate_Bill.pdf

[Guest Dan]

And no leftwinger has proven to me why this will work after the abject failure of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Fannie Mae, Amtrack and the Post Office. All of these government plans are in the red and will go bankrupt without massive infusions of new taxpayer dollars. So exactly why is Obamacare going to be different?

[Guest Dr. David A. Nealy]

Planned Parenthood was founded by, Margaret Sanger, a racist who advocated selective breeding of African Americans.

 

 

Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, a social philosophy which claims that human hereditary traits can be improved through social intervention. Sanger's eugenic policies ran to an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family-planning autonomy for the able-minded, and segregation or sterilization for the profoundly retarded. She expressly denounced euthanasia as a eugenics tool.

 

In A Plan for Peace (1932), for example, Sanger proposed a congressional department to:

 

Keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.

 

And, following:

 

Apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

 

Sanger saw birth control as a means to prevent "dysgenic" children from being born into a disadvantaged life, and dismissed "positive eugenics" (which promoted greater fertility for the "fitter" upper classes) as impractical. Though many leaders in the negative eugenics movement were calling for active euthanasia of the "unfit," Sanger spoke out against such methods. She believed that women with the power and knowledge of birth control were in the best position to produce "fit" children. She rejected any type of eugenics that would take control out of the hands of those actually giving birth.

 

Taking sharp issue in plain words with certain other eugenicists, however, Margaret Sanger completely rejected the idea of gassing the unfit. 'Nor do we believe,' wrote Sanger in Pivot of Civilization, 'that the community could or should send to the lethal chamber the defective progeny resulting from irresponsible and unintelligent breeding.'

 

Her first pamphlet read:

 

It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization. For upon the foundation of an enlightened and voluntary motherhood shall a future civilization emerge.

 

Planned Parenthood is the nation's primary, very well-reimbursed agent of infant homicide in the womb. Percentage-wise, this organization eliminates far more black babies than white. Margaret Sanger would be pleased.

[Guest IKovacs]

In nursing school, we learned about Margaret Sanger and our nursing instructors told us of her original intent to deplete the African American community. It's slavery all over again.