47 million uninsured ....

Preventive care, Obama-style...

A few more "details" from the latest version of "ObamaCare" now pending:

The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care. There is no focus on preventing health care need whatever. The plan's method is the most inhumane and unethical approach to cutting costs I can imagine.

The rationing of care is implemented through The National Health Care Board, according to the plan. This illustrious Board "will approve or reject treatment for patients based on the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment."

Translation.....if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced form of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer.....dream on if you think you will get treated.....pick out your coffin.

Oh, you say this could never happen? Sorry.... this is the same model they use in Britain.

The plan mandates that there will be little or no advanced treatments to be available in the future. It creates The Federal Coordinating Council For Comparative Effectiveness Research, the purpose of which is "to slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs." Yes, this is to be the law.

The plan also outlines that doctors and hospitals will be overseen and reviewed by The National Coordinator For Health Information and Technology.

This " coordinator" will "monitor treatments being delivered to make sure doctors and hospitals are strictly following government guidelines that are deemed appropriate." It goes on to say....."Doctors and hospitals not adhering to guidelines will face penalties."

According to those in Congress, penalties could include large six figure financial fines and possible imprisonment.

So according to The ObamaCare Plan....if your doctor saves your life you might have to go to the prison to see your doctor for follow -up appointments. I believe this is the same model Stalin used in the former Soviet Union.

Section 102 has the Orwellian title, "Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage." What this section really mandates is that it is illegal to keep your private insurance if your status changes - e.g., if you lose or change your job, retire from your job and become a senior, graduate from college and get your first job. Yes, illegal.

When Mr. Obama hosted a conference call with bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible, a blogger from Maine referenced an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance.

He asked: "Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?" Mr. Obama replied: "You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about."

Then there is Section 1233 of The ObamaCare Plan, devoted to "Advanced Care Planning." After each American turns 65 years of age they have to go to a mandated counseling program that is designed to end life sooner.

This session is to occur every 5 years unless the person has developed a chronic illness then it must be done every year. The topics in this session will include, "how to decline hydration, nutrition and how to initiate hospice care." It is no wonder The Obama Administration does not like emphasis on Prevention. For Mr. Obama, prevention is the "enemy" as people would live longer.

Thanks, and a hat tip to Jack Wheeler's "To the Point Newsletter."

So, we're going to increase coverage & reduce costs?

They've put off Sotomayor's confirmation vote for a week. Senator Sessions wants to study her record. Since it is unlikely that he'll actually be doing that, one may wonder, idly, what this is about. Most such Washington moves have some purpose, but we are not likely ever to find out what it is.

If the Senator wants to study something, he might try the Health Care Bill, which, so far as I know, not one Senator or Member of Congress has actually read. Indeed, I suspect that those who wrote the Bill have not read it: that is, it's a work of a committee, each of whom has an agenda, and there's no one whose job it is to look at everything to represent the interests of the American people.

Obama supports the health care bill, continuing to promise that people will be allowed to keep the health care plans they have now; while others, who have read that part of the Bill, say this is not true. There are other details, each of which will be important, but since we don't really know those details, we can't discuss them.

We can look at principles. We are told that we will increase health care coverage while reducing health care costs. I don't know how this is to be done, and I have heard no rational explanation for the claim. I do know that it's unlikely that rushing to pass a Bill that no one understands and almost no one has read is not the best way to accomplish that noble goal.

The way to lower prices is to increase supply, or decrease demand. If there's some other way to accomplish this, I have yet to hear of it. The Bill under consideration seems to increase demand (or at least increase the number of people entitled to make demands, including those with pre-existing conditions). I do not see how it will increase supply. There are other ways to reduce costs -- reform of the "punitive damages" system which allows enormous fines to be levied under civil rather than criminal rules comes to mind -- but the likelihood of any tort reforms in this Bill is essentially zero. Most of the "cost reduction" provisions don't seem likely to be wildly successful.

The President insists that the Health Care bill be passed right away. The silly season continues.