Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
(View past Libertarian pings here)
Posted on 06/01/2009 10:47:05 AM PDT by BGHater
With a faltering economy, and skyrocketing costs, healthcare continues to be a critical issue for all Americans. Unfortunately government encroachment into the doctor/patient relationship is poised to exacerbate our problems with healthcare.
As an OB/GYN with over 30 years of experience in private practice, I understand that one of the foundations of quality healthcare is the patient's confidence that all information shared with his or her healthcare provider will remain private. And yet, the Federal Government plans to undermine this trust with establishment of mandatory electronic medical records collections and “unique health identifier” numbers assigned to all Americans. Funding for this program was among the numerous provisions jammed into the stimulus bill rushed through Congress earlier this year.
Electronic medical records that are part of the federal system will only receive the protection granted by the federal “medical privacy rule.” This misnamed rule actually protects the ability of government officials and state-favored special interests to view private medical records without patient consent.
Aside from those concerns, the government’s ability to protect medical records is highly questionable. After all, we are all familiar with cases where third parties obtained access to electronic veteran, tax, and other records because of errors made by federal bureaucrats. We should also consider the abuse of IRS records by administrations of both parties. What would happen if unscrupulous politicians gained the power to access their political enemies’ electronic medical records?
For these reasons I have introduced the Protect Patients’ and Physicians’ Privacy Act, which allows patients and physicians to opt out of any federally mandated, created, or funded electronic medical records system. The bill also repeals sections of federal law establishing a “unique health identifier” and requires patient consent before any electronic medical records can be released to a 3rd party.
I have also introduced the Coercion is Not Health Care Act. This legislation forbids the federal government from forcing any American to purchase health insurance, or conditioning participation in any federal program on the purchase of health insurance. Forcing Americans to purchase government-approved health insurance is a back door approach to creating a government-controlled healthcare system. Congress would define what policies and coverage requirements satisfy their mandate. Does anyone then doubt that what conditions and treatments are covered would be determined by who has the most effective lobby? Or that Congress would be capable of writing a mandatory insurance policy that fits the unique needs of every individual in the United States?
With these conditions in place, I foresee the eventual imposition of price controls and limitations on what procedures and treatments that are covered. This will result in an increasing number of providers turning to “cash only” practices, making it difficult for those relying on the government-mandated insurance to find healthcare – the exact opposite of the desired result! Consider the increasing number of physicians who are already withdrawing from the Medicare program because of the low reimbursement and constant bureaucratic harassment from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
Congress should put the American people back in charge of healthcare by expanding healthcare tax credits and deductions, increasing access to Health Savings Accounts, respecting privacy and the doctor/patient relationship. Further politicizing and bureaucratizing of healthcare will only increase costs and reduce quality, as demonstrated by most other countries with socialized medicine.
‘the Coercion is Not Health Care Act’
Lol. Awesome!
Unfortunately government encroachment into the doctor/patient relationship is poised to exacerbate our problems with healthcare.And now they want to fix it FAIL.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=95
Added to this article by Ron Paul, and it makes for a very persuasivearguement against nationalized health care.
Ping
“makes for a very persuasivearguement against nationalized health care”
We really don’t need persuasive arguments, though, do we? The federal government does not have the authority (US Constitution Art. 1 section 8) to implement nationalized health care.
IOW, it’s against the law.
When has that outdated old piece of parchment ever stopped the Feds from doing as they please???? It’s NOT like it’s the Supreme Law of the Land or something important, is it? Or the contract between We the People and government which allows government to exist at our pleasure. Nah... couldn’t be anything like that.
This administration is going to do whatever it pleases. Being against the law won’t stop them.
...Pinged, and reading, thanks Bama...
Socialistic _resident. Socialistic congress. Socialistic supreme court. Should there be any doubt socialized medicine is coming our way?
IMHO, I think so. I have big doubts. The rats moved to the right to take back Congress starting in 2006. There's no big mandate for the left. The rats got Congress because of all their moderates, blue dogs & yellow dogs. Obama's big domestic initiatives, rationing healthcare and taxing energy aren't very smart.
Bump — good job, Dr. Paul.
bump!
“You should ping the usual “Ron Paul is a surrender monkey” crowd as well. Maybe their RNC masters have told them to agree with Congressman Paul on this issue.”
Until their RepubliCrat pals decide they’ve lobbied for just the right amount of Big Government—then they’ll go back to the old “Ron Paul does earmarks, loves abortion and undocumented, er, illegal aliens” b.s.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.