Eliminate the healthcare insurance industry that comsumes nearly 1/3 of our healthcare insurance premium dollars. These dollars go to CEO salaries/benefits/perks, shareholder returns, lobbying, political campaign contributions, administrative costs/overhead. and oh, profits. These are dollars that, if recouped, could be used to actually pay for our healthcare. Bring H.R. 676 to the Congressional floor and get it passed into law. That would lower our nation’s over-all cost of healthcare and provide the needed healthcare for every man, woman and child from birth to death. The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) does some good things, but it falls far too short. H.R. 676 would IMPROVE and EXPAND Medicare into a much better system for financing our nation’s healthcare. But how many of our elected officials are addicted to the corporate money coming in from the healthcare industry? Is it any wonder that they want to maintain the status quo?
http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-health-care-law-trek-not-sprint-154209732.html
Healthcare Costs…let’s make it personal. We are all well aware of the high cost of healthcare in the United States. As much as twice as high as many other developed nations in the world. The figures that we hear are sometimes difficult to put into perspective as they are such high numbers and don’t really seem to have much to do with us on a personal level.
To assist us in making these statistics relevant to us as individuals I would like to challenge you to calculate how much you/your family spends on healthcare on an annual basis. Most of us pay some kind of healthcare insurance premium so that would be part of our annual healthcare cost. Most of us also may Medicare taxes so that would also be included as part of our healthcare costs even though it may not be spent on yourself personally. Most of us who have healthcare insurance still pay some out-of-pocket healthcare costs such as deductibles, co-pays and uncovered medical procedures/products. Some of us may also have long term disability or extended care insurance.
There are also other healthcare costs that we pay individually that we are often unaware of. Anytime we pay a sales tax some of that revenue goes to pay for the healthcare benefit of a government employee whether it is city, county or state. Anytime we make a purchase of a good or service a portion of that sales price is used to pay for an employees healthcare costs. When we contribute to a church, temple or synagogue a portion of that contribution is used to pay for the healthcare costs of those who are employed by that faith organization. These are difficult costs for us to calculate so for the purpose of this exercise we will not attempt to include them.
Now I would ask that you add together what you spend on an annual basis for healthcare. Here is an example (figures are approximate but realistic in today‘s healthcare world):
Healthcare insurance premiums (medical/vision/dental): $5840.00
Medicare Taxes: 2160.00
Long Term Disability Insurance/Extended Care: included in healthcare insurace
Out-of-pocket Medical Expenses: 3000.00
Sales taxes at point of purchase that pays for healthcare: ??
Portion of purchase price of goods/services: ??
Total that can be calculated: $11,000.00
Now this example is for a family of two so the cost per capita would be $5500.00. But remember it does not include the costs that are paid through consumer purchases and sales taxes so it is a conservative estimate.
Imagine what it would be like if your family did not have to buy healthcare insurance. How much more money would you have for discretionary spending? Imagine businesses (large and small) that did not have to provide healthcare insurance for their employees. How much revenue that would free up for expansion and development and the creation of jobs.
It has been proposed that if we were to take all the current revenue being consumed by our healthcare system and create a single-payer national healthcare plan, we could cover every man, woman and child from the womb to the tomb and still have monies left over. H.R. 676 is such a plan. H.R. 676 would reduce our nation’s over-all cost of healthcare (and each individual/family’s cost of healthcare) and provide the financing for the healthcare needs of 100% of our population.
Please take the time to educate yourself about H.R. 676 by going to these web-sites:
www.mforall.org www.healthcare-now.org www.pnhp.org and www.madashelldoctors.com If you agree that our nation would be better off with a healthcare system more in line with the rest of the developed nations of the world please add your voice to promote H.R. 676. Contact your elected representatives and let them know how you feel.
H.R. 676: The Sustainable Solution to our Nations Economic and Healthcare Challenges
It’s time to look at the hard and real issues surrounding our nations healthcare and economic challenges. For too long there has been this exchange of rhetoric between the right and the left, progressives and conservatives, regarding the issue of healthcare reform. It is pretty much agreed on that healthcare costs are far too high in this nation and that the rate of cost growth is simply unsustainable. Everyone understands that each year healthcare insurance premiums rise at a disproportional rate to the rise in the cost of living.
While the Affordable Care Act (dubbed Obama-care) has many beneficial features and may contain costs to some extent, it is becoming obvious that it is not enough. There are still far too many who are without healthcare coverage. This is a continual added stress on our struggling economy when families and individuals encounter a major medical event and, as a result, lose their income forcing them into bankruptcy and/or foreclosure. These situations cost all of us directly or indirectly.
Opponents of H.R. 676 continue to use motive words and phrases such as “socialized medicine”, “death-panels”, “loss of choice”, and many others. In reality we already have “socialized medicine” though the VA Medical Administration, Medicare and Medicaid, and other federal, state and local government programs. In fact, these programs make up half or more of our nations healthcare expenditures. Considering that Medicare expends only about 4-6% of its revenues on administrative and overhead compared to the healthcare insurance industries 30% or more, it makes economic sense that H.R. 676 is the most economical and efficient way to move. The concept of “death-panels” came from the portion of the law which refers to whether healthcare providers should be compensated for consulting with patients and families regarding end of life issues. This issue is no different that what we call advanced directives and/or “no code” status in our present situation. As far as choice is concerned, the insurance industry restricts our freedom of choice in regard to the healthcare providers we wish to see. Under H.R. 676 one would be free to see any healthcare provider as long as he/she was licensed or registered in the state in which he/she practices. Of course, licensure and/or registration is already part of our healthcare system.
We need to move away from language that continues to distort and/or skew the issues we face. As I understand it there are individuals who specialize in creating language which will put either a positive or a negative (depending on which way they wish to move) connotation on any particular issue. This is an intentional attempt to sway public opinion. We need to move away from this and address the issues directly without the use of these motive words and/or phrases.
H.R. 676, if brought out of committee and enacted into law, would eliminate the need to pay healthcare insurance premiums. For those of us who currently pay these premiums imagine how much that would leave in our pockets. It would also eliminate the portion of the premiums that employers currently pay. This is money that small businesses and corporations could put to use in expanding and hiring. Think how this could stimulate our struggling economy…not only in the short term but far into the future. H.R. 676 would provide a sustainable method for which to pay our nations healthcare costs.
But what about the Republicans…especially the Tea Party Republicans…who have vowed “no new taxes”? Yes, new revenue would have to be raised in order for this healthcare plan to be implemented. However, the additional taxes would be far less that the healthcare insurance premiums that we are currently paying.
In the final analysis H.R. 676 would provide healthcare for every man, woman and child…everyone in and no one out…from the womb to the tomb, and would reduce our nations over-all cost of healthcare. It is sustainable economically and is the social and moral direction that our nation needs to go.
For more information on H.R. 676 go to www.healthcare-now.org www.pnhp.org www.madashelldoctors.com and www.mforall.org You can download a PDF copy of H.R. 676 from some of these sites as well.
https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/replace-affordable-care-act-hr-676/GzrHpdWW
Support H.R. 676: Reduce the overall cost of out nations healthcare…AND…provide healthcare for every man, woman and child…no exceptions…from the womb to the tomb.
Medicare for All (socialized medicine so called by some) is not a threat to our freedoms or our democracy (or republic). The real threat to our freedoms is the continual concentration of power/authority/money into the hands of fewer and fewer individuals or groups. This is true regardless of who those individuals or groups are. I’m sure that you have heard of the concept that “money is the root of all evil”. That”s not to say that money is inheritantly evil…it is to say that the drive/temptation for more and more is the real evil. It is when money becomes your “god”.
Please support Medicare for All…everyone in and no one out. The socially and fiscally responsible solution to our healthcare challenges. For more see my notes and posts and the various organizations supporting this concept.
Recently a family member underwent surgery. My health insurance carrier (who shall remain unnamed) sent me an Explanation of Benefits (EOB). As I reviewed the document it became obvious to me as to why health care costs are so inflated. The financial information on the EOB is as follows:
Submitted Amount Negotiated or Allowed My Deductable Amount Remaining Plan Pays My Responsibility
244.00 100.62 100.62 80.50 20.12
244.00 100.62 100.62 80.50 20.12
244.00 100.62 100.62 80.50 20.12
74.00 39.35 39.35 7.87 7.87
8283.00 1362.15 290.88 1869.22 1495.38 664.72 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Totals 9089.00 1703.36 290.88 2210.43 1744.75 732.95
What this shows is that the total amount billed by the provider to the health insurance company for three office visits, one x-ray and the actual surgery was $9089.00. Of the amount billed $1703.36 was negotiated or allowed. I had to pay a deductible of $290.88 and the portion that was “my responsibility” which came to $732.95 for a total out of pocket for me of $1023.83. The plan payed a total of $1744.75. So the provider received a total of $2768.58 (1023.83 + 1744.75). Anyone who has no insurance would be billed the $9089.00 and would be expected to pay that full amount. Why? Because health insurance companies negotiate with healthcare providers for discounts on the “usual and customary” medical fees. For a provider to bill an uninsured party less than they bill the insurance company would be in violation of their contract. Most healthcare providers rely heavily on healthcare insurance payments as most of their patients have some kind of healthcare insurance.
Observation; if most of a providers revenue comes from insurance payments, the providers must be able to operate quite well with the discounted fees. In this case the $2768.58 out of the billed amount of $9089.00. However, in order to receive the $2768.58 they must inflate their “usual and customary” fees. This, of course, is part of the reason why the uninsured can so quickly and easily become overwhelmed with medical bills.
We must remember that the healthcare insurance industry consumes over a third of the healthcare premium dollars that it takes in. These dollars are consumed on profit, salaries and benefits, top executive bonuses and perks, share holder returns, administrative expenses, advertising, political contributions, lobbying, etc, etc. These are healthcare dollars that otherwise could be expended by providing healthcare needs of those who are sick.
Medicare, in contrast, consumes only about 3% of the revenues that it receives on administrative costs. The rest is expended on those who have healthcare needs. This is only one reason why we need to establish a national single-payer healthcare plan such as what Physicians for a National Health Plan (www.pnhp.org) and Mad As Hell Doctors (www.madashelldoctors.com) are proposing. With a single-payer healthcare plan, such as Medicare for All, fees would not have to be inflated, those administering the plan could negotiate with medical suppliers and the pharmaceutical industry for better prices, families would not be in fear of being bankrupt due to medical needs, and on and on and on.
I invite everyone to educate themselves on this. There are several organizations that are working hard to promote this kind of a plan. Healthcare Now, Physicians for a National Health Plan, Mad As Hell Doctors, Americans for Healthcare are just a few. If you are on Facebook you can find these organizations as well. If you agree with this concept I would encourage you to get involved with one or more of these organizations, contact your elected officials and do all you can to help in promoting this effort. Medicare for All…everyone in and no one out.
To this observer it seems that there is a good deal of confusion on the part of the general public in regard to the issues involving healthcare reform. There are a number of reasons for this. First there is the use of motive language and deceptive terminology that has been used by those who opose any form of healthcare reform at all. Language using such words and phrases as “socialized medicine”, “death panels”, “government take over” and other such inflammatory wording. Another reason for confusion may be due, at least in part, because those who do see the need and therefore support reform, are not unified as to the how of reform. There are those who support a public option, others want tort reform, some want only a very limited involvement of government in the process and others who promote a single payer national healthcare plan. It is quite likely that those who opose any reform are quite delighted in the fact that supporters of reform are in such disaray. This lack of unity on the part of supporters may indeed contribute to the confusion on the part of the larger population. It may also contribute to the perception on the part of some that the majority of Americans do not want healthcare reform, when in fact, polls have shown that at least 66% of Americans actually do.
So what then is the best approach for those who do want reform? I spent about an hour and a half on the phone today with Dr Michael Rushnak who was instrumental in the founding of Americans for Healthcare. It was his opinion that all those who support healthcare reform come together and lay out all the various challenges that we face as a nation in regard to healthcare. Once the challenges are layed out discussion could take place in how each possible solution could best meet those challenges. This should be done in full view of the public so that the people would have the oppertunity to hear all the challenges and how the possible solutions may or may not meet those challenges. It would then be the people who would come to a consensus as to which solution(s) may be the best rather than the participants of the discussion.
I would think that if the participants in the discussion really felt that their ideas are the best they would not fear such a dialogue and then allow the general public to decide the best approach. It would then be the public that would let their elected officials know what they think. However, it will take a ground swell of the people in order to overcome the special interests groups in Washington. The special interest groups such as the healthcare insurance industy, the pharmaceutical and medical supply industries, the lawyers and others. Right now it is these groups that the legislators are listening to because they have the money and the power to help re-elect.
I would like to see all supporters of healthcare reform come together for dialogue in a mutually respectful manner and calmly discuss this highly important issue.
Ground was broken recently in Kansas City, Missouri. It was the ceremonial event for a nuclear weapons production plant. The honorable Senator Christopher “Kit” Bond touted the facility and its construction as a job producing endeavor and an economic stimulus to the area. Never mind that we do not need a nuclear weapons plant. We already have more “nukes” than any other nation. We spend twice as much on “defense” than any other nation. More than 50% of our national resources are consumed by the military-industrial complex of our nation. Never mind that the production of “nukes”, from the mining, refining/milling, transportation and manufacturing of nuclear weapons, has a negative impact on our environment and is a danger to public safety. Never mind that Senator Bond stands to benefit personally from the project.
As we do not need more “nukes” this, and other such projects around the nation, are tantamount to “corporate welfare” at its best, or perhaps better said, at its worse. We need to reduce the number of “nukes” that we have, not increase it. I would encourage anyone interested in learning more about the negative impact of nuclear technology (for both peaceful purposes and for nuclear weapons), to read any of Dr Helen Caldicott’s books on the subject.
Those of the conservative stripe continue to beat the drum of “fiscal responsibility”. How fiscally responsible is this? If we were to take only 30% of what is spend on “defense” we would be able to fully fund all of our current social service programs, end world hunger and provide every man, woman and child in this nation with quality, consistent health care.
If we want to create jobs and provide an economic stimulus to the area, then let’s spend it where it is needed, not where it only benefits special interest. We could spend it on our roads and bridges, on improving our air transportation system and on other types of infrastructure. The billion dollars that the nuclear weapons facility is projected to cost would go a long way in providing for the much needed improvements in these areas.
If you feel as I do, outraged, then please contact your elected officials and let them know. You can bet that I sure will.
Bly Road
Independence, Missouri 64056
July 30, 2010
Lt. Col. Elizabeth Delbridge-Keough
Lake City Army Ammunition Plant
Independence, Missouri
Lt. Col. Elizabeth Delbridge-Keough,
Congratulations on recent appointment as commander at the Lake City Ammunition Plant in eastern Independence. I wish you well as you undertake this new challenge.
In the past month I have been reading some interesting books by Dr Helen Caldicott. In her books she documents the use of depleted uranium (DU) in the manufacturing of ammunition shells and reinforced armor in some of our armored vehicles. For more on that please see my web blog at www.terryflowersblog.wordpress.com, the article dated July 24, 2010, Depleted Uranium (DU) in Munitions.
My question to you is does the manufacturing or processing of munitions at lake city utilize DU or any other radioactive material? I have emailed Congressman Emanuel Cleaver and Representative Clair McCaskill but have received no answer. I suppose that this could be a classified matter, but I live within two miles of the facility and am quite interested.
Thank you for your time and attention to my concern,
Sincerely,
Terry Flowers
www.terryflowersblog.wordpress.com
Green Technology…A Moral and Spiritual Imperative
We are all aware of the statistics of how the western cultures consume a large disproportionate percentage of the world’s resources. It could even be described as gluttonous. The rest of the world, because of the communications technology, have become more and more aware of the injustice caused by the lifestyle of the western nations, particularly the United States (US). In many ways they emulate the life style that they perceive we enjoy. Even the poorest of our citizens are much better off than a very large portion of the world’s population. While the rest of the world may wish for such a life style they also see the devastation that is being perpetrated on the planet.
The life style of the US has been built over the last 60 or so years on readily available cheap energy. In recent years it has become evident that the readily available cheap energy is not assured. All the raw materials that are necessary for the traditional energy sources, coal, oil, uranium, natural gas are finite in quantity. As humankind, and particularly the western world, continues to consume, these resources become less and less available. Not only does the extraction of the raw materials wreck havoc on the planet, but as the supplies dwindle, there is greater stress between the competing nations as they vie for access and control over them.
As I sit here writing I am reminded of the recent counsel in the Doctrine and Covenants 163:4, particularly 4b, “The earth, lovingly created as an environment for life to flourish, shudders in distress because creation’s natural and living systems are becoming exhausted from carrying the burden of human greed and conflict. Humankind must awaken from its illusion of independence and unrestrained consumption without lasting consequences.” Do we hear what is being said here? Do we really comprehend the implications of this passage?
As the raw materials for our rising need for energy continues to become more scarce, the relationships between the nations of the world become more and more strained. Most, if not all wars, when critically analyzed, have been fought over the access and control of natural resources. Those resources have been water, food, wood, oil, and just about any other non-sustainable or non-renewable raw material. This is why it is imperative that we begin to shift our investments from traditional energy sources to those that are sustainable and renewable. Energy sources that will be equally available to all the world’s nations. Otherwise there will be constant strife and conflict between the nations as they compete for the raw materials for the traditional energy sources. The natural consequence would be war, unless the “have” nations are willing to share what scarce resources are available with the “have-not” nations. This, unfortunately, has not been the history of mankind. It is just this situation that the US finds itself in today as it attempts to maintain control and access to the world’s oil supply. It’s time for a new direction.
Some advocate for nuclear energy. Uranium is a raw material that must be mined. It is also a very dangerous material. The mining, processing, enrichment, use and disposal processes all pose risk of contaminating the world with radioactive material that lasts for centuries. We simply do not have the technology to safely handle radioactive material. If that were not enough, it too, is in finite quantity and would cause competition between the nations for access and control. Again, it’s time for a new paradigm, a new direction.
If we love God, if we love our planet, if we love one another, we will make this change. Yes, there will be some difficulty in our economy as we make the shift, but the life of our planet and all life on it, is at stake. Much of what I have written has come to me from reading Dr Helen Caldicott’s books, from the scriptures, from what I hear in the media and from family and friends. It is my hope that humankind will awaken to its greed, for short term benefit, and realize the consequences of continuing down this path to self destruction and, indeed, to the destruction of all life on Earth. May we seek reconciliation with God’s creation and with all the people of the world.
