Posted on 03/16/2012 2:06:13 PM PDT by mdittmar
Every day, we hear stories of hard-working people struggling with the old health care system, like being denied care when they need it most or making choices between buying groceries and filling their prescription drugs. The good news is that things are changing because of the health care law, the Affordable Care Act.
For Steven, the law helped him get coverage under his parents’ health plan, which helped him fight cancer and finish college. And it gave Steven’s mom greater peace of mind that her son was getting the care he needed to be healthy and live the life of an active 23 year-old. Helen, a Senior in the “donut hole” coverage gap, got help with her prescription drug costs and can now get preventive health screenings without breaking the bank.
These are just a few examples of how everyday Americans are no longer at the mercy of insurance companies; these are our friends and neighbors. Thanks to “Steven-Care,” many young adults can get covered under their parents’ health plans, and thanks to “Helen-Care,” Seniors are getting help paying for prescription drugs.
To help explain what different parts of the health law mean for people, like Steven and Helen, we are launching “MyCare” – featuring new videos about people from across the country who have been affected by the law.
You can find the videos at Healthcare.gov/mycare.
After watching each video, we encourage you to share your story – in your own words or images – about how parts of the law may have helped you. Post your story on twitter with the hashtag #MyCare, or share your story at Facebook.com/HealthCareGov.
Feel free to get creative, and share stories, photos, or even videos.
The health care law is about people like Steven and Helen. It is about your care, and it is about my care.
Whose right is health care? Do you think it's yours?Congressman Anthony Weiner has said that health care is not a commodity. If it isn't a commodity then do doctors and nurses have rights? Assigning health care the status of a right makes health care workers slaves to that right who must serve it. On what ground could a health care worker refuse to provide their products and services since that would violate the patient's "basic human right to health care."
That is a direct loss of individual rights for health care providers. The collective right of the people to receive health care would supersede the provider's individual right to set fees and hours or to change their occupational status or even decide how to apply their skills and knowledge if taken to its logical extreme. A collective right, by practical definition, is a state right because it is a right that is created and given by the government to those it chooses to give it to. It is not a natural right possessed by each person protected by the Constitution from the government. It is also a collective/state right by virtue of the fact that it would supersede individual rights when the two come into conflict. How else would the government view a right that it created and administers vs. one it has no control over?
Of course it isn't stated in any bill that a patient's right to care supersedes a provider's right to set fees and hours etc, but it doesn't need to. Rights, as always, are adjudicated in the courts. The Health Care Reform bills simply establish the foundation for the courts to rule in favor of the collective right.
Weiner’s view is collectivist, fascist and totalitarian. Collectivist because it has to be described as being a right of the many instead of the one and superior due to that fact. Fascist because ultimately the sole authority for its creation and oversight is from one entity the Federal government. Totalitarian because the Federal government is the enforcer of this collective right as well. State and local jurisdictions will have little say about it.
Congressman Weiner's view is the underlying philosophy of all of the Health Care Reform legislation in the House and Senate. Consider this section in the Senate version of the bill; the setting up of community watch dogs that will monitor citizens for various health parameters. Read pages 382 - 393.
TITLE I—QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL AMERICANS pps 382 - 393
So, even citizens themselves will be subject to Federal regulations on their behavior in order to fulfill the "human right" of universal health care. It isn't the individual's liberty that is being protected by that it is the government's control over its own health care system that is being guarded. How much clearer can it be that these bills abrogate the concept of individual rights? Someone will be checking your lifestyle, according to gov regulations, to be certain you serve the best interests of the "basic human right to health care" ie. "the Public Option."
HCR is not just about rationing care and wealth redistribution. It's about the end of individual rights as the corrosive effects of the new collectivist "basic human right to health care" spreads throughout the legal and political systems like a virus.
I think that the main purpose of Health Care Reform (HCR) is as a direct assault on individual liberties.
Health Care is a Liberty Issue
Conservative Underground - 18 August 2009 - Tim DunkinAnother Stupid Argument: Heath Care is a Right
Obama's Authoritarian, Unconstitutional Health Care Proposal
To Americans Who Believe Healthcare is a Right
OBAMA: HEALTH CARE DESTROYING FREE SPEECH
Mandated health insurance threatens freedom, privacy
Bad Laws and Unintended Consequences, part 1.
Obamacare Rips Doctor-Patient Relationship Apart
Second Bill of Rights aka FDR's economic bill of rights
(An early attempt to embed collective rights into American politics and society.)
The entire government is part of Obama 2012.
My insurance company just called yesterday. I have been home a week after a 10 day stay due to complications from an unplanned c-section. They were offering me the opportunity to discuss my follow up treatment plan of action. I declined and told them I’d let my doctor determine that. How long before I have no choice but to accept their plan rather than my doctor’s?
Since when should my adult child by on my health care insurance???? Heck growing up my folks did not have health insureance (for them or us). it was pay as you go. Now admittedly my dad was a doc and my mom a stay at home mom who had an RN. We went to the pediatrition for the usual check ups and shots. If you were sick you got taken care of at home. We saw the dentist once a year ( not twice). Sometimes my dad swapped services, sometimes there were discounts, but the bill always got paid by us in one form or another. No insurance companies.
I still remember one family who had a son with a clubbed foot. My dad did the corrective surgery and follow up. He covered all the costs for this family because the man was self employed and had no insurance. The head of the family said that wasnt right and that they should at least work out a deal where the man could work off what he owed. My dad agreed and soaked him by asking him for two new stoves and a bigger refrigerator. That was it. Hand shake done and done.
Obviously that couldn’t happen today
Pelosi: Pass Health Reform So You Can Find Out What’s In It
REPEAL AND ABOLISH Obama”care.”
Nanzi Pelozi thought of that line while pinching her morning loaf.
Reid Scrambles for Health Care Bill Support
Brought to you by the Ministry of Truth .
“How long before I have no choice but to accept their plan rather than my doctor’s?”
Not long at all. It’s right around the corner, and in some instances has already started.
Yeah, and “We, The People” ended up with nothin’ but a big log.
“How long before I have no choice but to accept their plan rather than my doctor’s?”
Probably until the next time they call.
Yes, the few in a Ponzi Scheme at the beginning enjoy benefits. before it collapses.
Concise. Excellent. Accurate.
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.