If I voiced my feelings on this, I'd get banned from this site. So I'll just say continue to call, e-mail, contact your Reps, and Senators constantly and tell them to vote against this bill.
Appreciate the article, and it is frightening. The key piece of information is the bill number from which this was distilled. I found seven bills on this topic that had been introduced in the House and referred to committee. I would like to know which this came from, if you know.
I am generally opposed to having the government involved in the health-care business, but I have been unable to make any informed decisions based on the hyperbole and diatribe in the media, so I began looking for information about HR 3200, including the bill itself. In the process, I came across your post, which was “recommended” by another site because it was written by someone “who can translate government double-speak”. Indeed, your “gems” are succinct and direct, and quite frightening, leading me with even greater urgency to the bill itself. I have not yet read the entire legislation, but I did research the “gems” which you had highlighted in red, as they seemed to be more urgent.
Unfortunately, I have found so far that you are doing the same thing that the media is doing with this: taking items out of context or otherwise giving them a “spin” of your own. You are certainly entitled to your opinion and your own interpretation of the contents of this bill, but your “authoritative” style in this post is, sadly, misleading. Note that I am not saying that I support the legislation, but allow me to point out where I believe that you have given incomplete or inaccurate assessments of the bill’s provisions.
Page 59 says that the containing section is to be used to develop guidelines and standards “so as to... enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice”. This sounds to me like the government paying the health care provider, not having “access to all individual bank accounts”.
On page 203, you have fun with the line, “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax”. Although it does say that, it says more, which you seem to have omitted. It says that the tax imposed *under this section* shall not be treated as tax imposed *by this chapter* *for the purposes of determining... any credit*”. In other words, in the middle of a chapter describing a particular tax and related credit is a section which describes a completely different tax, one which is *not* to be treated as contributing toward the calculation of the credit. It’s technical, but your version is not just simpler, it is incomplete and therefore misleading.
Page 427 is in the middle of a long and complex section, but I do not see where in it that “the government dictates how [my] life ends”. Rather, it amends the Social Security Act by adding a new definition of a service that is available (not mandated): that of Advance Care Planning Consultation. The “orders” described in this section are the wishes of the patient, put into official legal and medical form, and signed by the physician. Many people do this already (i.e. living wills); this seems to me to just make it an official part of the Medicare Act so that it is available under a covered individual’s insurance.
This applies to your comment about page 429 as well, on which it clearly states (line 17) that such an order, “effectively communicates the *individual’s* preferences regarding life sustaining treatment”. This is similar to a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) order or a living will, just formalized into the official text and provisions of the Medicare Act.
In summary, I thank you for what I am sure are well-intentioned efforts to help people understand a complex piece of legislation, but I am afraid that your summaries have not helped me, and I will continue to read the bill itself and make my own decisions about what it does or does not provide.
I read through all of these and if this is true we are in for a world of hurt. But, are these really true? I asked my doctor 3 days ago about the item “all doctors get paid the same regardless of their speciality” and he said that was not true.
So my questions is this: Where can I find and download the real healthcare bill so I can double check all of these bits of information?
sigh...
“Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard. ‘
I had not heard this at all in the debate. But I do recall
when Hillary was trying to get her health care program this
was a very big issue that all Americans reejcted. Strange it was not on the radar for this bill debate.
Can we send this to our legislators and ask them to verify line by line these items.
Of course I would ask them to justify their reasons for each...
Also, this should go to the editorial pages of the newspapers and ask them why they didn’t have this same info for all of us to see .