Click here to view email in your browser






banner

CCHF Health Freedom eNews

October 31, 2012

President's Commentary

The real war on women is Obamacare. In Forbes, Avik Roy discusses "The  significant harm that Obamacare does to the fairer sex."  Here are five assaults:

  • Women own 8 billion businesses, but the Obamacare employer mandate extracts huge fines (up to $2,000 per employee) from any company with 50 full-time employees that does not offer insurance.
  • Under Obamacare, a "full-time" worker works 30 or more hours. Nine out of ten women in the U.S. work in the service industry, which are more likely to reduce hours to avoid Obama's employer mandate.
  • Women disproportionately own, and work for, small businesses. 85 percent of all small businesses file under the individual tax code, causing the owner to appear to have a higher income. Obamacare taxes people with over $200,000 incomes with a 31 percent increase in the Medicare payroll tax and a 3.8 percent surtax on investment income.
  • 3/5 of all Medicaid enrollees are woman and Medicaid is cutting services to woman as Obamacare adds an additional 11-17 million people -- disproportionately men -- into Medicaid, meaning less services for women.
  • Medicaid patients already are 2.5% more likely to be diagnosed late with breast cancer.
 
Will resistance to Obamacare end November 6th? Regardless of the outcome, it shouldn't. This is particularly true for the Obamacare government "insurance" exchanges, the single-seller bureaucracies that are actually federal takeover centers. Although there is a  rumor that HHS could push the state deadline back to December 1, the federal government has officially told states they have until November 16 to declare to HHS whether the state is going to: 
  • run (and fund) their own state-based federal exchange,
  • engage in a federal-state partnership with States acting as "storefronts" for the federal exchange, or 
  • allow the federal government to run a Federally-Facilitated Exchange in the state -- a complex idea that probably won't even work -- if the feds ever get the funding for it.

 

This "right to decide" is essentially the only right states have. Every exchange is a federal exchange under federal control -- no matter who is "running" it, Since the exchange is key to the federal takeover of health care, states should refuse any implementation of it or cooperation with the feds regardless of the outcome of the election. Without state cooperation, the law cannot go forward, no matter who gets elected -- or how long it takes to repeal the law.

The most liberal states are racing forward. Illinois' governor wants a partnership model the first year and then wants the state to "run" it. Washington state has adopted a new name, "Washington Healthplanfinder." California is deciding what plans can sell on the exchange and is seriously contemplating calling it, "Avocado," according to Politico Pro. Connecticut is going to let all "qualified" plans in the first year and may then cut back. Colorado hired CGI to build their exchange website.

Homosexuality has entered the exchange discussion. The exchange is viewed as a valuable tool for data collection. Maryland is already  asking for sexual orientation, gender identity and relationship status in their customer satisfaction tools. Like it or not, everyone will be asked. The liberal Center for American Progress has a  new FAQ on data collection opportunities in the exchanges:
 

"...[T]he future of health and health care is built on data. Data collection is indispensable to efforts to achieve better health for all by identifying, tracking and eventually eliminating health disparities...Sexual orientation and gender data will facilitate numerous activities of health insurance exchanges...[I]nitiating collection of these data is vital to establishing a baseline and, over time, identifying patterns of practice that point to opportunities for the exchanges to improve efforts to serve their diverse consumer populations...


What could this do to health care? Obamacare exchanges are required to "improve outcomes." Imagine how this data could be used against any doctor or hospitals who didn't improve outcomes under these data classifications, grant whatever is defined as "equal" access, or in any way follow one's own conscience on this very sensitive issue. For instance, how would a Christian clinic that decides not to offer same-sex couples counseling be scored on improving outcomes or eliminating health disparities? Could there be legal consequences or civil rights implications?

The Federal exchanges are not simple one-stop shopping tools to buy insurance. They are meant to transform the entire health care system into one that violates the U.S. Constitution, the patient-doctor relationship, free markets, personal conscience, the Hippocratic Oath and the right of citizens to not buy insurance, including government-issued insurance.

Just say no --- and don't forget to vote!

Join Us Nov 15 to Support CCHF! Great News! Deadline for Pre-Registration Discount Extended to November 8 due to Election!

 

 




News to Know:

Administration Invokes Executive Privilege on Obamacare

The Treasury Department says no. Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) asked the Treasury Department to hand over all documents pertaining to the IRS rule that allows the Obamacare exchanges not run by States to offer premium subsidies. A careful reading of the law allows such subsidies to be issued only by state-established exchanges. The Treasury Department has cited executive privilege and refused to share the documents. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has threatened a subpoena. Meanwhile a lawsuit has been filed against the IRS by the Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt. Treasury claims turning over documents would limit free and unfettered discussions. But Issa says, "The Administration's refusal to shed light on the development of this half-trillion dollar extra-legal rule is stunning." (Politico Pro, October 26, 2012)

National "Public Option" Emerges 

Multi-state health insurance plans will be offered by the U.S. government nationwide through the government exchanges. These national plans will be "offered to consumers in every state," reports  The New York Times.  Supporters of the national plans claim they'll increase competition with other private insurers. Detractors note that it's not clear that these plans will have to comply with all the state laws and state regulations that other insurers have to comply with. Thus, it wouldn't be a level playing field. In addition, the national plans don't have to be certified as meeting the "qualified health plan" standards of the exchanges, while every other insurer must be certified to participate. 

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners, which represents state regulators, is alarmed: "It is absolutely essential that multistate plans compete on a level playing field with other qualified health plans, which are subject to state insurance law," the NAIC said in a letter to the federal government. Who thinks the Obama administration is listening? This may become the single-payer "public option" that supposedly didn't make it into the law...but did.

Will You Be Forced into Medicaid?

Government "insurance" exchanges are going to force many people into Medicaid, the government subsidy program for the poor. As Brandon Clark from the consulting firm FrogueClark told CBS Charlotte, "A lot of middle class individuals are going to apply for a state exchanges...thinking they're going to get a Blue Cross Blue Shield plan or a United Plan, like they had before...But they will find out they're not on private health insurance, but rather, a state Medicaid program." 

He points to Section1311(d)(4)(F) of Obamacare which states that "if through screening of the application by the Exchange, the Exchange determines that such individuals are eligible for [Medicaid, State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), or] any such program [the Exchange shall] enroll such individuals in such program." The law requires the use of "modified adjusted gross income" (which includes deductions) to determine eligibility so Clark says, "you could easily have a family of four or five making well over $50,000 per year ending up on Medicaid." When you think about the ramifications, consider that one-third of physicians already  refuse to take new Medicaid patients.

The New Tuskegee

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been conducting not-so-protective experiments on human beings. A lawsuit has been filed by the American Tradition Institute. Since 2004, the EPA has allegedly been exposing human subjects -- many already health-impaired with asthma and other conditions (old age) -- to high levels of air pollutants such as diesel exhaust and fine particulate matter, known at PM2.5 at an EPA facility at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine. The EPA has regulated PM2.5 since 1997 "on the basis that it kills people,"  reports The Washington Times. The EPA counters by saying people are warned that they can die, but the warning is only stated verbally, never written as the federal Common Rule for research requires. Three North Carolina-licensed physicians are involved in the experiments. While the North Carolina Medical Board has opened an investigation, President Obama's bioethics commission has refused to get involved citing a full agenda.

Deaths from Flawed Government Hormone Study?

In 2002, the media reported that combined estrogen and progestin replacement therapy led to more heart attacks in women. The findings  announced by the National Institutes of Health, were from the Women's Health Initiative, an ongoing study of a large group of women volunteers. But the findings were very flawed, according to experts in the field. Women's health specialist Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D., in a presentation earlier this month, reports that a 12-year 2007 study of the very same WHI women on estrogen alone found the women had a 63% lower risk of breast, a 46% lower risk of heart disease, and a 50% lower risk of all-cause mortality. The 2007 study was published in Great Britain. No media storm occurred to correct the 2002 data, and the NIH study was never publicly negated. 

As a result of the 2002 findings, many women are not taking replacement hormones. Vliet says OB/GYN Professor Phillip Sarrel, M.D. at the Yale School of Medicine estimates that 60,000 women in U.S. alone  have died over the last decade due to the exaggerated risk announced by the the NHI and the sudden recommendation of the FDA and many national medical organizations for women to stop taking their hormones. Studies have consequences. Vliet notes that these hormone replacement services for women are being cut in Medicare under the 2010 Obamacare law. For a more comprehensive overview of the complexities of this issue,  look here.




Quotes of the Week:

"That, [taking the Oath of Hippocrates very seriously], was one of the reasons I resigned from the insurance contracts in 1986. Because I felt that they were asking me to sell out my patients and I couldn't do it. I couldn't sleep at night....I want to encourage all of the medical students in the room. Do not sell your soul to the insurance company devil.  If you answer to your patients, they will honor you with having you be their physician and they will appreciate that you only answer to them." -  Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D., Annual AAPS meeting speech, October 5, 2012.

 

"I've never been more excited about the practice of medicine than I am now...From our first day in 1997, we adopted an honesty in pricing model. And it didn't take long before we realized, after hearing from patients that had surgery in other places, that we were, most of the time, 80 percent less than our big hospital competitors across town and many times 10 times less, and we were making money." -  Keith Smith, M.D., Surgery Center of Oklahoma, videotaped conversation with Congresswoman Marcia Blackburn (R-Tenn), October 13, 2011.

 

 

"At first I thought EMR [electronic medical record] sounded like a good idea. Then our practice started using one. Tasks that once took seconds to perform on paper now require multistepped points and clicks through a maze of menus....As a colleague remarked, it seems as if this is all about taking care of the chart, as opposed to taking care of the patient. Documentation is important, but the pointing and clicking and cutting and pasting we are so focused on in demonstrating meaningful use of EMR may be getting in the way of meaningful encounters with our patients." - Anne Marie Valinoti on the federal "meaningful use" mandate in the 2009 Recovery Act ("stimulus"), The Wall Street Journal, October 22, 2012.




Stats of the Week:

$318 million - estimated revenue from increase in Medicare payroll tax (from 2.9% to 3.8% on individuals above $200,000 and families above $250,000).

43.4% - the new Obamacare dividend tax (up from 15%).

20% - the new Obamacare capital gains tax (up from 15%).

$42 billion - the total cost to states of expanding Medicaid roles by 25% (2014 - 2022).

$1.2 trillion - the cost of federal premium subsidies through Obamacare exchanges (over 10 years).

82,000 - people signed up for Obamacare pre-existing condition program (CBO had estimated 700,000 might join).




News Release of the Week:

CCHF to States: Just Say No to State Health Insurance Exchanges

ST. PAUL, Minn. - With a looming deadline of Friday, November 16, many states are still determining whether to move forward with a state health insurance exchange. To date, only 15 states have declared a definite intent to proceed with such an exchange, and six others have declared opposition to a state exchange, and with good reason, according to the Citizens' Council for Health Freedom.

"These exchanges are clearly the hallmark of Obamacare, taking power from the citizens and the states and handing it over to the federal government," said Twila Brase, President of the Citizens' Council for Health Freedom. "In actuality, government healthcare exchanges are not the one-stop-shop marketplaces that they are touted to be; they invade privacy, track compliance with the controversial mandate, may impinge on care, and will decimate state budgets." Continue reading




Featured Health Freedom Minute:

Be Scared of Obamacare

Itʼs six days before the election and here are six reasons to be afraid of Obamacare.

1) Obamacare expands Medicaid when 33 percent of doctors wonʼt accept Medicaid patients.
2) Obamacare cuts Medicare dollars to pay for Medicaid as 77 million babyboomers are becoming dependent on Medicare.
3) Young people will experience sticker shock as their premiums rise by up to 30 percent.
4) Religious organizations are forced to offer birth control in violation of their conscience.
5) The IRS will track and enforce the insurance mandate through Obamaʼs health exchanges.
6) There are at least 20 new taxes.

  Continue reading

Twila Brase broadcasts a daily, 60-second radio feature, Health Freedom Minute, which brings health care issues to light for the American public. Health Freedom Minute airs on the entire American Family Radio Network, with more than 150 stations nationwide in addition to Bott Radio Network with over 80 stations nationwide.

Click here to listen to this week's features.

Citizens' Council for Health Freedom
161 St. Anthony Avenue, Ste 923
St. Paul, MN 55103
Phone: 651.646.8935 • Fax: 651.646.0100
Email: info@cchfreedom.org
www.cchfreedom.org



Unsubscribe from weekly e-news

To change your email address, please email bharrison@hamiltonstrategies.com with the old and new addresses.



Forward this to a Friend
About CCHF