Too Early to Celebrate the Health Care Reform Lawsuits!

Thanks to the fine work of the Attorney General in Florida and Mark Levine, Esq. of the Landmark Legal Foundation, and to the great legal mind of Federal District Court Judge Henry Hudson. The President’s use of the commerce clause to implement two key portions of health care reform may be hampered. These are the individual mandate and the penalty for failing to buy insurance.

But wait!

The following features of the law are still intact:
• No preexisting condition limitations
• Limitations on the premium differentiation across enrollment groups
• Removal of co pays and deductibles on preventive care, effectively killing savings accounts and major medical only plans

Those of us for rational market reform should not lose sight of how war is waged. The Waxmans and Kennedys have worked for 70 years to incrementally change the minds of Americans about government’s role in health care.

They brought us Medicare for seniors, Medicaid for the poor, Medicare for those with disabilities, Medicaid for those with disabilities, CHIP for children, CHIP/Family Care for Adults, and Medicaid for individuals…

The single payer crowd has long understood the concept of eating an elephant one bite at time.

Since this lawsuit leaves the key provisions of the health care law in place, that only work with an individual mandate:
• Premiums will increase drastically—when only the sickest and the most risk adverse are the only ones with insurance, insurance costs more.
• If one limits the price differential between age and sex groups for purchase then the healthy, whose experience is not considered will not take insurance and the cost will increase.
• Citing the failure of the program without the individual mandate, looking to increased numbers of uninsured and increased cost the only option will be single payer.

While we celebrate, they continue to eat the elephant.

What we conservative mistake for overreaching may, in fact, have been a brilliant use of the long confidence game—the long Con.

There are short Cons and long Cons. Short Cons are games like three card Monte and letters telling you have won. The long Con is more elegant and takes patience. The mark (victim) must feel that they have won or are smarter than the confidence man along the way.

We, the Marks, now feel that we are the winner when the confidence man has us positioned to handover our wallets…control of our health care in the final move of this long Con.

Please don’t accept partial wins and open up the champagne. Let’s repeal all of this monster. The only thing that stops a confidence man it his tracks is a two letter word—NO!

Moveon.org and Talk Radio Agree and the World Keeps Turning

I never thought there would be an issue where the Left and the Right agree. Well, there was that family cap issue in New Jersey welfare where both pro-abortion and pro-life groups agreed, but that was the last century.

Both the Right and the Left are in agreement on the TSA x-ray screening and the pat downs that either follow or are used as an alternative. And the world keeps turning. I am not sure how I feel about this, the issue of x-ray screenings, not the agreement.

Here are my thoughts:

* For those of us who fly every month, if not every week I have concerns about the level of radiation we are receiving

* For children who are still growing I have concerns about the level of radiation they are receiving

* Wouldn't it make sense to only subject those who meet a level of threat assessment to enhanced screening (I like to say when 6 foot tall, pale Black women start crashing planes into buildings or taking flying lessons with no interest in landing you can pull me out of the line every time for additional screening. At least until I and every other pale, Black woman confronts our peers and stops the threat)

* Do we need protection against underwear bombers if during the year it took to put this technology in place there was not a single copy cat?

* Rather than responding to the last big terrorist attack, shouldn't we be looking for a way of preventing the next big terrorist attack?

* Using this technology for those traveling by train, subway and boat? Really?

* Can someone please tell me why we are not using bomb sniffing canines? They are inexpensive, thrilled when they find something and only offend the ethnic group that so far has been responsible for the attacks. And by the way, the dogs are truly impartial.

* I personally like the deterrent effect of having automatic weapon carrying, military personnel in my airport

So those are the musing of someone who can't believe who we are becoming. And if both the far Left and far Right agree it makes me think that there are no shades of gray in just plain wrong.

The quote from Benjamin Franklin in 1775 keeps running through my head--"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Leadership

I have been thinking about the concept of leadership lately. It has come up in all levels of my life and interaction with others in the last month or so. A quote I saw from former President Bush made me realize what has been nagging me about leadership. It made it clear that the leader can not be the center of attention if a group, company or country is to survive and thrive.

He stated--

"A leader's got to understand the culture that you develop is not about you," Bush said at Saddleback Church in Southern California. "Organizations fail too often when the leader becomes the center of the whole organization. Your church succeeds because you recognize you're serving something greater than yourself."

For me this is the clear difference between Presidents of the past and our current leadership. When I listen to our President speak today, so often it is about “I” or “me” or “my”. Leaders are not above the group they lead, they are a part of the group they lead. There is nothing bigger than President Obama or a purpose more important than him in all of his speeches and actions.

It is the cult of personality—the separation of a leader from those he/she leads that creates failure. It is the lack of clearly articulated goals that all can buy into or reject that makes for the success of the team the leader leads. In the case of President Obama, he has failed to articulate goals for his team. This is not to say there are not goals, but if you disrespect the intelligence and independence of those you lead, it becomes very hard to have transparent, apparent goals. When the goals one pursues are in direct conflict with the goals of those on the team which you lead, the leader is forced to hope that personality is enough. Sort of like the magician, keeping your eye on the left hand so you won’t notice the right hand.

I once attended a speech by the first female admiral. She stated that you manage paper [information] and lead people. She also pointed out that you share credit for success, but take responsibility for failures alone, as a leader.

From President Obama to his cabinet to our elected officials, they seem to have this formula backwards. They take credit alone for successes and heap failures on everyone else from the voters (or our ignorance for not accepting their programs) to past administrations to the world just not recognizing their value.

True leadership involves accountability and grace.

Don't Expect Maturity from November 2010 to January 2011!

I have spent a lot of the last two years trying to define what the talk media has been calling "tone deafness" exhibited by our President, Speaker of the House and other Democrat elected officials. When our President tries to rekindle images of slavery and racial oppression; when our Speaker of the House feels that we are too stupid to know that passing a bill that we haven't read is a problem; and, when prominent television personalities are comfortable describing the majority of Americans as "ignorant" and "too stupid to know what is good for them", it is more than tone deafness.

Today as listened to Bill Maher malign the majority of Americans it hit me--there is no emotional intelligence/maturity in this administration. Emotional intelligence is missing in the dialogue of the ruling Democrats. For those of you who are new to the concept, emotional intelligence/maturity is defined as "a self-perceived ability to identify, assess, and control the emotions of one's self, of others, and of groups."

Not convinced? Bring on the name calling as well as the character assassination. Consider Joy Behar calling Sharron Angle out of her name, and the even less gracious way that Behar accepted the return jab of flowers.

My point? Don't expect maturity from this crew if they loss big on November 2nd. You should expect a tantrum of legislation and executive orders that will occupy the first year of the new Congress with repeals and legal challenges. And our President, who promised a new age of civility will continue to act as the "Playground Bully in Chief."

While I pray that I am wrong...well, we'll see!

PA Pro Life Federation Dinner

I had the pleasure of attending the PA Pro-Life Federation Dinner last night. The speaker was Rick Santorum. Mr. Senatorum made me remember some key aspects of being an American. To better remember them I reread the Declaration of Independence last night. I remembered that in declaring our independence from England we stated that:
* All men are created equal
* Our Creator has endowed us with inalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness
* Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

We long ago defined men as humans in our law (not gender or race).

We have forgotten some very important parts of the these three points. These equal humans include those born and unborn and sick and imperfect. One of the inalienable rights is the right to Life. And finally, that government derives its power from the consent of the governed.

We must reclaim these attributes of being an American. We can no longer consent to a government that tells us that our lives may be inconvenient or too expensive to allow them to start or continue.

We must not allow our government to tell us what is good enough for what we are or who we are in the delivery of our health care.

We must not consent to government by those who read polls that state that over 50% of Americans are Pro-Life or that over 70% of Americans are against government control of our health and our health care system, and yet dismisses us as too scared or stupid to know what we really want.

We must not continue to consent to the patronizing attitudes of liberal or conservative politicians who do not respect the people who elect them or the system in which they serve.

We must reclaim these attributes of being an American on November 2nd. Do not compromise and do not consent to allowing those who do not respect us and our system of government to continue to govern us.

My Husband and I Can't Afford to Pay Your Health Insurance and Ours!

I just read an article about how people can't afford health insurance now that the COBRA subsidy is expiring. Please people let's look past ourselves and see who we are asking to pay.

I was laid off in June of 2008. Why is the date important? Because all the subsidies and expansions started for those laid off after September of 2008. My husband has a struggling landscaping business, so my job had always provided our health care coverage. COBRA for us was about $1,000 per month. We took it! My husband has been a type 1 diabetic for the last 42 years. Not only could we not afford private insurance, most private insurance would not cover us.

When my COBRA expired, we found sole proprietor insurance for my husband's company that allows us to have less coverage for about a $1,000 per month. We have struggled and paid this since my full time employment ended. I work on short term consulting projects, and sell a few books, etc. And do you know what else I have been paying?

We, my husband and I and all of our friends who are struggling, have been paying for you who have received the subsidy. The only subsidy I was ever eligible for was an extension of unemployment which I turned down. Why? Because the limitation on what I could earn while on unemployment would not allow me to make enough to cover our health insurance and help with our mortgage. We have struggled and paid our taxes so that others can spend their spare time complaining that we are not interested in continuing to subsidize their subsidy.

I have a suggestion. Be grateful for all the months that those of us who are barely employed, working for ourselves and struggling to pay our benefits, paid to help you with your benefits. Say thank you and now find a way to help us, by helping yourself.

I know it is hard...I am there with you. I want to help, but I just can't afford you and us.

Dialogue About Race for Mongrels

Up until two years ago, I did not think about race every day. You may find this a funny statement when you realize that I am a Black woman, married to a White man, with three White stepchildren. In addition, my brother's family is Black and Hispanic. Even my Border Collie mix is black and white.

Race was there, but in the background. It didn't determine what door I entered, what water fountain I drank from, or where I sat on a bus. It didn't determine my wages or limit my ability to attend two of the best universities in the United States. So why now, in 2010, are we speaking of race and race relations as though it is 1950?

Because it takes our eyes off the real issues of our time. Like any good magician, our president knows that if we are looking at his right hand we will not notice what the left is doing. With something as sensitive and heart wrenching as our own attitudes about race in his right hand, we will not notice our country changing with his left. We will not notice the left hand creating positions above the purview of the House, Senate and Judiciary. We will not notice the slow nationalization of our industries through taxes, mandates and oversight. We will not notice the slow closing of our windows into our government's actions through slow repeal of the Freedom of Information Act requirements. We will not notice the redistribution of wealth through increased government employment and benefits. We will not notice the movement to remove the achievement-based character of Americans through increased incentives to accept government control and funding of our lives.

I pray that the speed with which our president is moving his left hand will avert our eyes from his right hand. I pray we will open our mouths and shout, "No more!"

America, you are not racist. We all have racial encoding from past experience, but if we treat each other as we would like to be treated--our humanity will always overcome any indoctrination that others try to instill in us. So trust your heart, America. Stop trying to prove that you are not something, and go back to being comfortable in your kindness and generosity. Don't let government make you question who you are. And don't let this administration distract you with meaningless arguments. Focus on being Constitution-based Americans!

We are of one race--we are Americans!

Shirley Sherrod Do you hear yourself?

Before we start, let's remember I am a Black woman. Apparently that is somehow relevant to my ability to be candid about Ms. Sherrod's words and actions. So much for a color-blind, post racism administration. There are 5 parts of this story that should shame all of us as Americans:

1. Our government hired a person to represent it who sees race before need. Ms. Sherrod, I am so glad that your story ends with how you grew beyond these feeling, but you should have turned down the job if you wanted to use it to provide preference to people on the basis of color.

2. Ms. Sherrod believes that telling the world that she now understands that the goal of her position was to move resources from the haves to the have nots, not from Whites to Blacks should make us feel better. Forgive me, but I did not realize that her title was Regional Director of Wealth Redistribution?

3. Ms. Sherrod gets perferential treatment--a do over--when the multitude of conservatives who have misspoken or been taken out of context do not? Oh, I forgot liberals even get to say that being in the Klan was a youthful indiscretion (Sen. Byrd). Conservatives do not get context, do overs or explanations--just resignations in shame.

4. Ms. Sherrod may I introduce you to the concept of shame. Aren't you ashamed to admit that you used your position for anything other than helping all farmers? Or that you lead with your color, not your compassion? Or that you feel you need to tutor Americans, America and the President about "how we feel?" And who are "we?"

5. Finally, the idea that people will listen to interviews with Ms. Sherrod and not see her as a poster child for how liberals must divide us by groups to maintain control. And yet, people will still vote for this divisiveness in the fall.

How Stupid Do American's Look to Politicians and the PRess

So today as I read my e-copy of AHIP' Hi-Wire Connection, a clipping service of America's Health Insurance Plans, I had to ask myself, "How stupid do the press and politicians really think we are?"

The first article listed was an AP story on how Americans receive too many tests and are over treated, especially at the end of life entitled, "Overtreated: More Medical Care Isn't Always Better." This by-lined piece was full of anecdotal information about families who complain about the treatment their family members received, including a radiologist who complained that his daughter had too many abdominal scans after her car accident. How many of you see this as a legal problem not a medical problem? If he weren't a radiologist, do we really believe that the ER would have been as interested in practicing defensive medicine? Or the family that complained that their dying family member received an unnecessary test. So talk to your physician.

This article was so devoid of statistics. The most significant attempt at citing statistics was a mention that 1/3 of all test are proved to be unnecessary. Doesn't that mean that 2/3 of the tests were needed. What portion of the 1/3 are found to be unnecessary though hindsight, but could not be predicted as such prior to a negative result.

At the same time that we are being told by the government that we should work later into life and be healthier, a blanket statement is made about PSAs for men over 75 and the idea that treating someone at that age for prostate cancer is unnecessary. Should not that be determine by the vitality of each individual 75 year old?

The second story was about how scientist are debating whether or not recessions are good for health. Oh, please! I am supposed to believe that reduced air pollution due to idled factories and fewer commuters means we as a society are healthier. What about the increased stress and pollution from having to fly or drive to jobs outside of ones community just to keep enough money coming in to protect ones home and health insurance premiums. Or the stress of constant job hunting? Or are suicide rates also looked at? Or what about mental health versus physical health?

Interestingly enough, these fine observations in the two articles are coming from the National Quality Forum and the American Medical Association. The National Quality Forum which is listed as a non-profit has received $10m in 2009, and will receive that amount per year until 2012 from the federal government to "help establish a portfolio of quality and efficiency measures that will allow the federal government to more clearly see how and whether healthcare spending is achieving the best results for patients and taxpayers. The contract is part of a provision in the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 that directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services 'to contract with a consensus-based entity, such as the National Quality Forum.'" In English, to figure out how to ration health care as the federal government becomes increasing involved in paying for it.

The American Medical Association should be recognized as a decidedly left wing group that represents only 19% of all practicing physicians. Nineteen percent is a generous estimate, since many of its members are students, residents and research fellows whose lack of real world experience has not yet allowed them to see how irrelevant this group may be to a practicing physician.

Personally, I would rather have a group of practicing physicians, who deal with real people and real families daily making the rules, than researchers and a fringe group of physicians and medical students. And forgive my consumerism, but I think that patients should be a part of any committee deciding policy.

Name one other industry that so devalues the customer's opinion? We are not stupid! We are consumers! Consumer of a good that could cost us our lives.

Crist and Specter--hard lessons

So Florida, here is what we in Pennsylvania know about politicians who change parties:

- They tend to walk squarely down the middle of the road
- This allows them to have very flexible morals
- You should not count on their conviction to anything other than their own success

We, in Pennsylvania, had these lessons driven home to us while listening to ads for Arlen Specter's, mercifully unsuccessful, run to retain his Senate seat. Don't get me wrong, Sestak is no prize either, but he does get consistency points. Hey, that is the Dems problem not mine. We also have to remember that Arlen Specter was a Democrat, before he was a Republican, before he was a Democrat again. Each time, the change was only related to what he wanted to do to insure a win. (Sorry Arlen, you played that card one time too many.)

Here a man who ran ads with President Bush to defeat Toomey in 2004, happily ran ads about how he has stood solidly with President Obama to try to defeat Sestak.

Just like Crist, Specter was often mentioned as "having the ability to cross the aisle" and being "middle of the road." My husband is fond of saying when you walk down the middle of the road, you get hit by traffic on both sides. Remember my dear Florida voters, these phrase translate as "believing in anything that will get you elected."

These men, by changing parties have proven one thing and one thing only--the job is more important to them than their commitments to the voters. Gov. Crist, I think that soon to be former Senator Specter now knows that winning isn't everything.

To the voters in Florida, congratulations on having a clear and principled choice--Marco Rubio, just as we in Pennsylvania get to do a do-over and vote for Pat Toomey.

Social Service Safety Nets

We often talk about safety net programs.

What happens when a person falls into a net? They are caught, trapped and unable to get free. We should be building safety ladders not safety nets. Our government programs should provide a cushion at the foot of the ladder to allow for a soft landing while the individual recovers and gets up and continues climbing.

We have built a culture of dependency.

Programs today such as endless extensions of unemployment, public health care expansions and all manner of government assistance, rob people of their ability and desire to get back up on the ladder and continue climbing.

Incentives are everything!

The other day I heard a man on the radio lamenting his moral dilemma. What was it? Should he go to work or continue to receive public insurance for his child, unemployment for him, and other assistance to his family including tax refunds of taxes he had not paid, while he continued to live in his large, paid for home in Pennsylvania.

By his calculations, the salary he would need to offset his benefits was substantial. Therefore, it was more beneficial to him to remain unemployed. Remember the rest of us work and pay him to stay home...in relative luxury!

Shame on him...and shame on us for being a society that has taught people to do the math prior to looking for work or insurance or income or...

Shame on us for not creating a society where pride and self reliance have a value in that equation. A society where work has value!

Why? We have become so good at keeping people trapped in the net.