Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts
House Vote Approves Use of Slaughter Rule; Liar Rep. Jason Altmire Votes For Slaughter Rule
Chuck Norris reveals Dirty Secret in Obamacare
Chuck describes Dirty Secret #1 in his most recent article on Obamacare. . . ....which is the Government
coming into homes and
usurping parental rights
over child care and development!
Congress continues their sneaky, deceitful ways. Since Congress could not get it passed in the Education Begins at Home Act last year, they have snuck the Support for Quality Home Visitation Program in the health bill. This is government intrusion at the highest levels. This starts even before the child is born-how outrageous is that!!!
PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children.
While this section of the bill states that this is a voluntary program, the government will be targeting communities with a high proportion of low-income families. I believe that this will lead to coercion by the government and its officials to force this as well as its propaganda on low-income parents.
The government under this program is supposed to:
"Employ well-trained and competent staff, maintain high quality supervision, provide for ongoing training and professional development, and show strong organizational capacity to implement such a program..."
When the hell has there ever been a competent, well-trained Government Official especially in today's day and age? What a joke!!
In this section of the bill it is stated that there will be "activities designed to help parents become full partners in the education of their children"!
Full Partners with who? Oh! Hell no!!
Not the Government!!!
Chuck Norris states,
Are we to assume the state's mediators would understand every parent's social or religious core values on parenting? Or would they teach some secular-progressive and religiously neutered version of parental values and wisdom? And if they were to consult and coach those who expect babies, would they ever decide circumstances to be not beneficial for the children and encourage abortions?
One government rebuttal is that this program would be "voluntary." Is that right? Does that imply that this agency would just sit back passively until some parent needing parenting skills said, "I don't think I'll call my parents, priest or friends or read a plethora of books, but I'll go down to the local government offices"? To the contrary, the bill points to specific targeted groups and problems, on Page 840: The state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families.
Are we further to conclude by those words that low-income families know less about parenting? Are middle- and upper-class parents really better parents? Less neglectful of their children? Less needful of parental help and training? Is this "prioritized" training not a biased, discriminatory and even prejudicial stereotype and generalization that has no place in federal government, law or practice?
Bottom line: Is all this what you want or expect in a universal health care bill being rushed through Congress? Do you want government agents coming into your home and telling you how to parent your children? When did government health care turn into government child care?
This is yet another example of how our government wants to control our lives as well as future generations. This is one more reason Obamacare must be stopped!!
Part1: The Case Against Obamacare
While reading analysis on Obamacare on the website http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18208 I came across some very stunning information.
1)Right there on page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal, says Investor's Business Daily (IBD).
The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:
With Exceptions such as:
2)Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it.
3)Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.
I thought Obama said we could keep our health insurance plan, I guess NOT for as people switch from one job to another this would force Americans to participate in Obama's public-option.
As a critic of the Obama health care Govt. single-payer public option, here is further evidence of how this plan will take away individual freedom:
Drawn by a public option that will be 30 percent to 40 percent cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington's coverage.
The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program.
That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers; this could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, "fizzle out altogether."
What wasn't known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law, says IBD.
This legislation would effectively kill off health savings sccounts, which is what Democrats have wanted for years. Health savings accounts would give individuals more control over their medical care, and the government less control. But, with Obama's public-option(which is not an option at all) it would give a huge amount of control to the government in regulating our health care needs.
Obamacare=Government Control=Rationing of medical Care
Here is the text by Investors Business Daily:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=482329
Additional Troubling Evidence Regarding Impact of Single-Payer Health Care(Like Canadas):
1)Right there on page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal, says Investor's Business Daily (IBD).
The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:
With Exceptions such as:
2)Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it.
3)Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.
I thought Obama said we could keep our health insurance plan, I guess NOT for as people switch from one job to another this would force Americans to participate in Obama's public-option.
As a critic of the Obama health care Govt. single-payer public option, here is further evidence of how this plan will take away individual freedom:
Drawn by a public option that will be 30 percent to 40 percent cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington's coverage.
The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program.
That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers; this could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, "fizzle out altogether."
What wasn't known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law, says IBD.
This legislation would effectively kill off health savings sccounts, which is what Democrats have wanted for years. Health savings accounts would give individuals more control over their medical care, and the government less control. But, with Obama's public-option(which is not an option at all) it would give a huge amount of control to the government in regulating our health care needs.
Obamacare=Government Control=Rationing of medical Care
Here is the text by Investors Business Daily:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=482329
Additional Troubling Evidence Regarding Impact of Single-Payer Health Care(Like Canadas):
1)Canada's mortality rate is 25% higher for breast cancer
2)Canada's mortality rate is 18% higher for prostate Cancer
3) Canada's mortality rate is 13% higher for colorectal cancer, and . . .
4)50% of all diabetics have trouble with high blood pressure. It is controlled in 36% of cases within the United States, but only in 9% of cases in Canada
Do Other Countries With a Single-Payer Health Care System Have Greater Access to Care?
1)Britain has only one-fourth as many CT scanners per capita as the U.S
2)one-third as many MRI scanners
3)The rate at which the British provide coronary-bypass surgery or angioplasty to heart patients is only one-fourth the U.S. rate
4)hip replacements are only two-thirds the U.S. rate
But, the U.S. Tops in:
5)The rate for treating kidney failure (dialysis or transplant) is five times higher in the U.S. for patients between the ages of 45 and 84, and nine times higher for patients 85 years or older.
Further Grim Reports in Long Waiting Periods for Medical Procedures Under a Single-Payer Option, Which is what Obama's Health Care Reform Bill actually is.
"Overall, nearly 1.8 million Britons are waiting for hospital or outpatient treatments at any given time. In 2002-2004, dialysis patients waited an average of 16 days for permanent blood-vessel access in the U.S., 20 days in Europe, and 62 days in Canada. In 2000, Norwegian patients waited an average of 133 days for hip replacement, 63 days for cataract surgery, 160 days for a knee replacement, and 46 days for bypass surgery after being approved for treatment. Short waits for cataract surgery produce better outcomes, prompt coronary-artery bypass reduces mortality, and rapid hip replacement reduces disability and death. Studies show that only 5 percent of Americans wait more than four months for surgery, compared with 23 percent of Australians, 26 percent of New Zealanders, 27 percent of Canadians, and 36 percent of Britons."
I am thankful to http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Socialized+failure:+dissecting+health-care+data+from+Britain,+Canada,...-a0199802195 with supplying me with some health care information, also.
These are some of the reasons I note as why I am against Obamacare. It is not an option, but in fact the Govt. so called option would be forcing Tyranny on us all. This is not what our founding fathers fought for in the American Revolution. Our founding fathers fought for their freedom against tyranny, the kind that Obama is proposing. I will continue addtional updates regarding the health care issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
