Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan

[me]

 Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan:


Commentary by Betsy McCaughey

Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama's stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill's health rules will affect "every individual in the United States" (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and "guide" your doctor's decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, "Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis." According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and "learn to operate less like solo practitioners."

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not "meaningful users" of the new system will face penalties.  "Meaningful user" isn't defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose "more stringent measures of meaningful use over time" (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the "tough" decisions elected politicians won't make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle's book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept "hopeless diagnoses" and "forgo experimental treatments," and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform "will not be pain free." Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle's book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration's economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration's health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. "If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it," he said. "The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol."

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it "inexcusable and irresponsible" for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation's gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.

(Betsy McCaughey is former lieutenant governor of New York and is an adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. The opinions expressed are her own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Betsy McCaughey at Betsymross@aol.com
Last Updated: February 9, 2009 00:01 EST

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

This sure don't sound good.   

[Exterminator]

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S.

Nope; the government is.

[me]

Nope; the government is.

And Congress is hell bent on making it the "only" employer.

[Henry Hawk]

Nope; the government is.

and it is going to get bigger....

[Exterminator]

and it is going to get bigger....

This sure is ironic coming from a Bush-lover...talk about expanding the government!

[Anne]

What do you all think about the government directing your health care? Insurance does it now to some extent, will it be worse with the government?

[Bo D]

What do you all think about the government directing your health care? Insurance does it now to some extent, will it be worse with the government?

If you have ever had an HMO plan, then you would know that the insurance company is totally in charge of your health care.

I once had an HMO with New York Life. My wife and I were out of town (at the beach) and she had an allergic reaction after eating shrimp scampi. We had to rush her to the emergency room at the local hospital. The doctors there told us if we had been a couple of hours later, she could have died.

Yet ... New York Life denied the payment for the emergency room. They claimed an allergic reaction was not an emergency. I appealed and sent them the statement of the doctor who treated her. Again they denied the appeal and sent me a list of things they didn't consider an emergency ... on the list was "broken bones"

[me]

If you have ever had an HMO plan, then you would know that the insurance company is totally in charge of your health care.

I once had an HMO with New York Life. My wife and I were out of town (at the beach) and she had an allergic reaction after eating shrimp scampi. We had to rush her to the emergency room at the local hospital. The doctors there told us if we had been a couple of hours later, she could have died.

Yet ... New York Life denied the payment for the emergency room. They claimed an allergic reaction was not an emergency. I appealed and sent them the statement of the doctor who treated her. Again they denied the appeal and sent me a list of things they didn't consider an emergency ... on the list was "broken bones"

But had the government been dictating it the Dr. would not have been allowed to treat her at all.  There is a huge difference. 

[Henry Hawk]

This sure is ironic coming from a Bush-lover...talk about expanding the government!

I never claimed to be a "Bush-lover".........just not a "Bush-hater'.....he allowed WAY too much gov spending to happen....

[Bo D]

But had the government been dictating it the Dr. would not have been allowed to treat her at all.  There is a huge difference. 

What an idiotic statement!

[me]

What an idiotic statement!

I think you had better start paying attention to the rest of the bill and not just the part that says everyone will be insured.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill's health rules will affect "every individual in the United States" (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and "guide" your doctor's decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, "Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis." According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and "learn to operate less like solo practitioners."

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not "meaningful users" of the new system will face penalties.  "Meaningful user" isn't defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose "more stringent measures of meaningful use over time" (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the "tough" decisions elected politicians won't make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle's book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept "hopeless diagnoses" and "forgo experimental treatments," and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform "will not be pain free." Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle's book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration's economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

[kimmi]

Keeping doctors educators informed of the newest medical educational findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

I'm just saying!

[Palehorse]

One of the things that scares the grape juice out of me about this is the government's penchant for labyrinths of paperwork.  It doesn't take much imagination to conjure up a scenario surrounding someone sick with the flu having to first file 2 or 3 reams of paperwork just to get the OK to see a doctor about it. And then having that OK delayed further by the fact the sick person forgot to check a box on page 883 of the forms. . . 

Sure, "its all electronic", but how many arthritic or Alzheimer's patients are going to even be able to manipulate a mouse; not to mention the fact that an overwhelming number of the population is computer illiterate. . .

[kimmi]

Oh maybe we will have No Doctor Left Behind!!  That would be awesome!!  And yes Pale, they can endure paperwork, comparisons to other doctors whose clientele is different than theirs, maybe they can take their funding away if they don't "cure" enough people!

That freakin' rocks! 

[Bo D]

I think you had better start paying attention to the rest of the bill and not just the part that says everyone will be insured.

I think maybe you had better pay attention yourself.

I described a life-threatening situation.

Where in your little op-ed article does it say that doctors will have to refuse treatment in such a situation?