Posted on 09/02/2009 9:08:22 AM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion
You didn't read this in your local paper, but 2010 could be a catastrophic year for elderly heart and cancer patients. Bloomberg News reports that President Obama has proposed cutting $1.4 billion in Medicare payments to heart and cancer specialists.
An Obama administration plan to cut Medicare payments to heart and cancer doctors by $1.4 billion next year is generating a backlash that’s undermining the president’s health-care overhaul.
...The proposal by Medicare, the government insurer for the elderly and disabled, is an effort by Obama to focus U.S. medicine on preventive care.
...The cuts could have the unintended consequence of rationing care, especially in rural regions with a large number of Medicare patients, doctors said...
Some oncologists in rural areas may stop offering chemotherapy in the office, forcing patients to travel to more- distant hospitals...
Gee, grandpa, I sure hope President Obama's Politburo-style, central planning commission gets all of these delicate decisions right.
And while Obama and his Democrat allies in Congress try to ram a multi-trillion, socialized medicine program down the throats of the American people, the separate 2010 Medicare spending proposal has received almost no media attention. Announced July 1, it proposes to slash reimbursements to cardiologists and oncologists by more than 10% each.
Consider, for a moment, that the number of American senior citizens (65 and over) is soaring and medical specialists were already projected to be in short supply. In fact, the Census Bureau predicts that the number of seniors will more than double from 40.2 million in 2010 to 81.2 million in 2040.
These disastrous government policies are certain to hurt seniors.
It's a real pity that the mainstream media couldn't find time to cover this story, although I'm sure Ezekiel Emanuel is pleased.
You mean its not just a cut that is a “cut in the rate of increase?”
More seriously, can this be traced directly to Obama or a close appointee, or is it the result of a bureaucrat going off on his own? I think the former—under the past half-dozen Presidents, medical reimbursements were close to sacred, to avoid pissing off the senior vote. Obama hopes to finesse that by replacing them as quickly as possible with indoctrinated younger voters and dependent, newly naturalized illegals.
But OK voted 65% NObama
Interesting, went to Bloomberg ... that article is there ... but then clicked on on of bloomberg’s links on “Administration Plan” ... and that link at the “Medicare and Medicaid Services” (.gov) site “doesn’t exist.” Did they “pull” something already?
0bamaCare hasn't received any media attention either except to demonize protesters at townhall meetings.
State Controlled Useless Media (SCUM) have hardly raised any questions or concerns about it.
Remember Tim "ChickenLips" Russert who used to drag out his whiteboard and ask, "How are you going to pay for it?" when Republicans were pushing for tax cuts?
Not one single Media Butt Brother has bothered to ask how cutting a foot off one end of a blanket(Savings from Medicare-Medicaid) and sewing it to the other end (0bamaCare)makes the blanket longer and warmer and costs less money
I sure am glad they got rid of those “death panels” <\sarc>
That’s interesting...
I’m not vouching for anything currently on the table, but let’s get real: something is going to have to be done about these programs. What the answer is I don’t know, but it’s obvious that there is a speeding train coming at us and everybody is frozen on the tracks.
And the Death Panel has convened....
Expect more and more conditions will be placed on the “Do Not Treat” and “Do Not Resuscitate” listings.
We shall not have to concern ourselves with any more cures for cancer, ever again. None will be allowed to be used.
Medicine retreats to the Middle Ages.
"Beginning"??
There is a provision in, I believe, the Senate Health Bill [is that the Kennedy-Dodd bill?] that says the maximum differential of spending for Health Care for the old vs the young will be 2 to 1. The current ratio is 7 to 1. [I believe I heard this on the Laura Ingraham show]
And Obama has the gonads to say that it won't lead to rationing......bald face lie.
...we have to make it clear to Obama that we will not willingly climb under the bus!!
It's an incredibly valid and probing question that just begs an answer......And I believe I've come to the answer.....
He isn't worried about a second term because he expects his first term to last for life....I truly believe that he is of the opinion that the in following years he will manage to subvert the Constitution to the point of being the SECOND President for life (FDR being the first one) except without those bothersome elections.
2010 can't get here fast enough....and remember.....Hitler had a Parliament before he disbanded it.....
I agree. We need to get everyone off government health care and make them buy insurance policies (many oldsters can afford them) or provide credits to buy them. Only when the risk is allocated by actuaries, and the money from the premiums is invested so it brings a return, will the market be able to bear the costs of paying for medicine for these folks.
Many reforms are out there, as I’m sure you’re aware. Real reform can help. But one question: what’s wrong with spending lots of money on medicine? Why does it need to be scarce? Why not make the US the best and most comprehensive medical system in the world?
What if we regulated and monitored the computer industry the way we have the medical industry?
If you are elderly, and still voting Obama, you might not be around next election....if Obama has his way
0bama is cordially invited go to hell and join Ted Kennedy. My father-in-law is in his late 60s and is battling colon cancer. I double dog dare 0bama to tell him to his face that his Medicare coverage will be reduced next year. We’d be reading stories nationwide about the cancer victim that kicked the crap out of the (so-called) pres__ent.
The only bright spot about this is that the 2010 elections are going to be an absolute bloodbath for the democrats. I predict huge gains for Republicans as a direct result of the actions of this administration and this congress.
2010 can't get here fast enough...
I think you're on to something EXCEPT I wouldn't count on 2010 having one of those pesky elections either.
Who says it is an UNintended consequence?
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.