About two weeks ago, then President-elect Obama vowed this:
By JENNIFER LOVEN
WASHINGTON (Jan. 7) – President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that reforming massive government entitlement programs — such as Social Security and Medicare — would be “a central part” of his effort to control federal spending.
Noting that the Congressional Budget Office had just estimated he would inherit a $1.2 trillion federal deficit for fiscal 2009, Obama promised to cut unnecessary spending.
“We expect that discussion around entitlements will be a part, a central part of those plans,” Obama said. “And I would expect that by February in line with the announcement of at least a rough budget outline we will have more to say about how we’re going to approach entitlement spending.”
My first response was, “Gee, instead of holding half of the money from the bailout funds until it’s time for Congress to run for re-election in 2010 and using the rest for pork barrel spending now (mainly to banks and little “gifts” to various groups he’ll need in 2012), wouldn’t it be great if the damned cash could be used to create a real healthcare system instead of looking at already strained programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to “reform”? Maybe look at a system which would save businesses money, maybe keep more jobs at home, etc. etc.???” Too simple, I know…the Wall Streeters and banks need to be at the feeding trough first and get their mitts deeper into these programs…
So, since we’re not going to get REAL healthcare improvements, we should wonder how Obama Administration will address THIS issue…
From the American Association for Health Freedom’s January 6th, 2009 edition of Pulse of Health Freedom newsletter :
Now, Health Freedom Watch reports that a lawsuit has been filed to challenge the withholding of social security benefits from seniors who decline Medicare Part A. Kent Masterson Brown, an important constitutional attorney, believes that this Social Security policy is illegal because “forced participation in Medicare infringes on a citizen’s right to privacy and to make necessary choices about his or her own health care, and, accordingly, violates the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.”
The three plaintiffs in the lawsuit say that forced participation in Medicare Part A interferes with their doctor-patient relationship and their choice of a hospital. While these plaintiffs have catastrophic health coverage insurance and savings to pay for their hospital care, one of the plaintiffs, Norman Rogers, stressed in a National Press Club news conference that the physicians who care for his parents, who are in a nursing home, face restrictions from Medicare in how they conduct their professional practice. Medicare is infamous for reams of regulations that dictate care, often in contradiction of the doctor’s professional opinion and the patient’s right to choose.
With every indication that there will be a push for government funded and administrated healthcare for all Americans, the limited healthcare freedom of choice faced by Medicare and Medicaid recipients is a lesson that consumers and practitioners alike should heed. Read the AAHF position paper regarding private contracting under Medicare Part B to educate yourself about healthcare freedom of choice under government-administered health insurance.
Will the Administration let people opt out? After all, Obama is the guy who isn’t for “universal healthcare” anyway. Or, will they fight the suit with the aim of perhaps further penalizing people, like we are now penalized in $$ if you don’t sign up for Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Coverage immediately (and Part D is a huge shuffling of money around for which we are paying through the nose)?? It would be a nice source of extra cash if they could levy huge “fees” on people who still wanted to opt out, no matter what the cost.
So, there’s another thing to be watching for especially if you’re on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. And there are rumblings about disability benefits as well. Wonder what Mr. Constitutional Lawyer Obama thinks about this suit, if he even know if it exists? (After all, he wasn’t even sure about that executive order involving Gitmo…) Where does all this fit in his plans for healthcare “reform”??
The question is not just about cutting spending…it’s about what is jeopardized in terms of care. Do you trust Obama, Tom Daschle or the Democrats in Congress with YOUR health?
I sure don’t…
Filed under: Current Politics | Tagged: American Association for Health Freedom, bailout, Barack Obama, Congress, Democrats, disability, Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, First Amendment to the Constitution, Fourteenth Ammendment to the Constitution, Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, Gitmo, Guantanamo Bay, Kent Masterson Brown, Medicaid, Medicare, Medicare Part A, Medicare Part D (Prescription Drug Coverage), Ninth Amendment to the Constitution, Pulse of Health Freedom newsletter, Social Security reform, Tom Daschle | 14 Comments »