We’ve got plenty of time to stop Obamacare from going into effect, because it doesn’t start til 2014 and he will be out of office by then and it will have been repealed or overturned by the Supreme Court by then anyway, right? Right?
Wrong. The wheels are turning. The attorneys general of 26 states, in a big publicity splash after O’Care was passed, filed suit to stop it. Now, having rested on those laurels, they are content to do their reelection campaigning, and running for higher office, based on how brave they were for filing a lawsuit. In the meantime, did you know about this one? Starting in 2012 your health insurance plans, wherever you are, will be required to fork over a $1-per-person fee (to be increased in succeeding years, naturally) to the government to be used to do research on whether your pills are effective or not. Doesn’t matter whether you think they help you, or even whether your doctor thinks they help you. Big Nan (otherwise known as the Death Panels) is going to step into the discussion and you, through your insurance premiums, are going to pay some graduate student or professor at Michigan State, e.g., grant money to provide Big Nan the assurances Nan needs to take your meds away from you. That about succinct enough for you?
Starting in 2012, the government will charge a new fee to your health insurance plan for research to find out which drugs, medical procedures, tests and treatments work best.
Not being intimate with the lawyerly pursuits, we don’t know all the ins and outs, but isn’t it the custom in high-profile cases, cases which affect masses of people and huge chunks of commerce and public activity, that plaintiffs seeking relief would, pending ajudication of the case in toto, seek injunctions or restraints upon some, any or all of the provisions of the offending acts? Are we to believe that, even if the Death Panels don’t go into full force and effect until 2014, or are ruled unconstitutional late in 2012, that these monies being collected from insurance companies after the first of the year impose no burden on anyone? Why do people think the insurance companies are already raising their rates? It’s because they have to start complying now with provisions in the law, even if it doesn’t go full bore til 2014.
This is not rocket science. And the law may be 1,700 pages long and the enactors may not have had time to read it before passing it, but that was two years ago and all the legal eagles supposedly on board with stopping this thing have by now surely had time to read and digest it. We have pleaded on these pages before for an expedited Supreme Court review, based on these same premises – that parts of the law were going to start being implemented and good money was going to be spent and the public was going to be conditioned to accept enough parts of this monster that it eventually would become somewhat ingrained in the culture and in practice, further diminishing hope that the whole thing would be overturned by a Court not inclined to rule against the ‘people’s representatives’ in Congress.
Can’t someone find a federal judge somewhere (there are 864 of them, you know) to grant an injunction or something? Little Giselda in East Lansing is already taking out student loans and writing applications for grants because she wants to be on the cutting edge of Death Panel Research in the service of Teh Won. What if Justices Scalia and Thomas thwart her? She might sue for breach of promise.
And furthermore, why is it that more funding needs to be generated for “research”? We have been regaled for decades with the amounts of money Big Pharma, and Big University, separately and in collaboration, have spent on research. And the FDA, HHS and other government entities already supply research grant money to Big Medicine. In order for a generic to be approved in the first place, doesn’t there have to have been “effectiveness” testing?
The only possible reason for having a program like the one referred to is to provide a rationale for denial of care/treatment/ medication, because, as is defined by it’s stated purpose, the health care act was to not only insure health coverage, but to control costs. Any research not showing that health care practices currently in use are inefficient would be counter to the notion that there was need for the Patient Care Act of 2010 to begin with, and therefore, confoundingly, this provision of the Act could be used to show the Act was unnecessary. ( But, of course, those of us not holding our hands out already knew that.) So the only possible justification for this ‘research’ is to provide a basis for denial of payment/care and to uphold the wisdom of trusting in Big Nan.
Major insurers already are carrying out their own effectiveness research, but it lacks the credibility of government-sponsored studies.
Sarah Palin made the claim, now widely debunked, that Obama and the Democrats were setting up “death panels” to ration care.
As a result, lawmakers hedged the new institute with caveats. It was set up as an independent nonprofit organization, with a .org Internet address instead of .gov
Oh, so since “lawmakers” gave it an IP address of .org instead of .gov, that means it’s ‘independent’? Why, of course!
Employees and family members could be steered to hospitals and doctors who follow the most effective treatment methods
Yes, yes. Steer them. Steer them.
“Our goal, our hope, is that over time …………………………………………….trust will rise.”
Oh, yes, the all-important trust. Remember folks, it’s “.org”, not “.gov”, so you can trust it!
Former Medicare administrator Gail Wilenski ….. A Republican, Wilensky believes opposition to the institute’s work is shortsighted.
A Republican? Well, why didn’t you say so before? That just seals the deal right there!
/Bangs head against wall. Pleads for help. Pleads for sanity./