It's All Political

Four facts and an opinion

Fact 1:  The Administration announced, it is delaying until 2015 the requirement that businesses with more than 50 employees provide health insurance to their workers or pay a penalty.

Fact 2:  The Administration did not change the individual mandate, requiring Americans to purchase insurance beginning January 1, 2014, or pay a penalty on their taxes to be filed by April 15, 2015. 

Fact 3:  The Supreme Court ruled that the individual mandate is legal as a tax, but States are not required to participate in the programs outlined in the law.

Fact 4:  2014 is a mid-term Congressional election year.

Opinion: Many small businesses cannot afford the added cost of medical insurance.  They would need to close, or reduce their number of employees to less than 50.  This would impact the already high unemployment rate and cause even more economic strife in an election year. 

On the other hand, the individual mandate will not have an economic impact upon many Americans until they file their 2014 taxes in 2015, months after the mid-term election.

The Administration is playing politics and will do all they can to blame the other party.

Don't Say Nobody Warned Us.

I have been attempting to go through some old boxes of "saved" items, to clean out some of my clutter.  It is a slow process because I keep finding things that divert my efforts.  Things like the article I saved from the Auburn Journal, Sunday, March 7, 1993.  Wow, that was 20 years ago.  Well, I am not sure why I saved it, but I find it to be a very interesting article.  All I know about the reporter is that Dalia Baligh worked for AP in the 80s and 90s, and did a lot of reporting from Egypt.  Below is an image of her article.

The Land of Opportunity

I believe that we have lost sight of what this country is.  This is a land of opportunity. 

Inscribed below the Statue of Liberty that stands on Liberty Island in New York Harbor, are the words,

“Give me your tired, your poor,

your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

  The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

The entire sonnet, The New Colossus, by Emma Lazarus is inscribed upon the plaque, but these are the most often quoted lines.  These words embody one of the basic principles upon which our nation was built.  This country was built by people who left everything they knew, and took a chance at a new life, and by their children who accepted this new land as their home.  These people sought opportunity.  These were the risk-takers.

Our nation was built by risk-takers.  The people in Boston that threw the tea in harbor were taking risks.  The signers of the Declaration of Independence were taking risks.  The colonists who fought the British Army were taking risks.  The Americans that left the eastern cities to head west for land or gold were taking risks.  The Rockefellers, The Carnages, Edison, Ford, the Wright Brothers, and so many others were taking risks.

And for every risk-taker that was successful, there were dozens of others who failed. Every small business owner, every farmer, every rancher, every scientist looking for the next great discovery is a risk-taker.  And for every one that is successful, dozens will fail.  Why do they do it?  They do it because we are the nation built by those who would take the risk, those who sought the opportunity to succeed, knowing that they might fail.  With success comes a better life.

It seems to me that we have now reached a point where there are those who want to remove the risks; they want an even amount of success for all.  If you succeed, they would have you share your success through higher taxes with those who failed, or worse yet, with those who never even tried.   

I do believe in charity, but I believe that it is the individual who should decide how he or she will share with the less successful.  The more the government attempts to redistribute the rewards, the less the risk an individual is apt to take.  In the past it has been the greater the risk the greater the reward.  Now it seems some would say the greater the reward the greater the burden to share with those who did not succeed.

It occurs to me that this governmental attitude is in many ways like the Medieval practice of the Catholic Church selling indulgences.   Perhaps what we need is a modern day Martin Luther.

THE Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee

Ever hear of the IPRCC.  Wasn't it Bill Clinton who is often quoted, or miss quoted as saying, "I feel your pain."  Well Obamacare is doing something about it.  Yep, the Affordable Health Care Act has allowed the formation of another Federal Committee to summarize research, identify gaps, and make recommendations.  Let's all get together and sing Kubia.

From: http://iprcc.nih.gov/healthcare-act-provisions.htm

IPRCC Healthcare Act Provisions

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) (Public Law 111-148) provisions related to the Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee are as follows:

1. Establishment - The Secretary shall establish not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section and as necessary maintain a committee, to be known as the Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (in this section referred to as the 'Committee'), to coordinate all efforts within the Department of Health and Human Services and other Federal agencies that relate to pain research.
2. Membership -
   
   1. In general.--The Committee shall be composed of the following voting members: (i) Not more than 7 voting Federal representatives appoint by the Secretary from agencies that conduct pain care research and treatment. (ii) 12 additional voting members appointed under subparagraph (B).
   2. Additional members.--The Committee shall include additional voting members appointed by the Secretary as follows: (i) 6 non-Federal members shall be appointed from among scientists, physicians, and other health professionals. (ii) 6 members shall be appointed from members of the general public, who are representatives of leading research, advocacy, and service organizations for individuals with pain- related conditions.
   3. Nonvoting members.--The Committee shall include such nonvoting members as the Secretary determines to be appropriate.
3. Chairperson - The voting members of the Committee shall select a chairperson from among such members. The selection of a chairperson shall be subject to the approval of the Director of NIH.
4. Meetings - The Committee shall meet at the call of the chairperson of the Committee or upon the request of the Director of NIH, but in no case less often than once each year.
5. Duties - The Committee shall-
   
   1. develop a summary of advances in pain care research supported or conducted by the Federal agencies relevant to the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of pain and diseases and disorders associated with pain;
   2. identify critical gaps in basic and clinical research on the symptoms and causes of pain;
   3. make recommendations to ensure that the activities of the National Institutes of Health and other Federal agencies are free of unnecessary duplication of effort;
   4. make recommendations on how best to disseminate information on pain care; and
   5. make recommendations on how to expand partnerships between public entities and private entities to expand collaborative, cross-cutting research.
6. Review - The Secretary shall review the necessity of the Committee at least once every 2 years.

Full text of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148).

Second Meeting of the Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee

NIH Campus

Building 31—6th Floor, Conference Room 10

Bethesda, Maryland

October 22, 2012

You Can't Unring the Bell -- The Law is the Law

February 25, 2012 in her 14-minute speech in Charlotte, North Carolina, to the  Human Rights Campaign (HRC) gala (the country's largest gay and lesbian civil rights group) Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, democrat Kathleen Sebelius,  said that a host of Obama-initiated advances for the gay community could be "wiped out in a heartbeat" if the Republican presidential nominee wins this year.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/25/3046465/sebelius-rallies-lesbians-gays.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/25/3046465/sebelius-rallies-lesbians-gays.html#storylink=cpyat the Charlotte Convention Center,Democrat Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said a host of Obama-initiated advances for the gay community - including repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the militaryHuman Rights Campaign, the country's largest gay and lesbian civil rights group.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/25/3046465/sebelius-rallies-lesbians-gays.html#storylink=cpyDemocrat Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said a host of Obama-initiated advances for the gay community - including repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military - could be "wiped out in a heartbeat" if the Republican presidential nominee wins this year.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/25/3046465/sebelius-rallies-lesbians-gays.html#storylink=cpy

These statements were a direct violation of the Hatch Act which prohibits appointed government officials from engaging in campaign activities in an official role.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/25/3046465/sebelius-rallies-lesbians-gays.html#storylink=cpKathleen Sebelius, violated the Hatch Act. (This law prohibits federal employees from using their official authority to influence an election, although it allows partisan remarks made in a personal capacity.)

 Her official response was that any violation was "technical and minor" and was corrected after her official trip was reclassified as political, and the government was repaid for her travel. (The Democratic National Committee reimbursed the government $2,514.50 for the portion of the trip that was deemed political.)

This "event" was investigated by The United States Office of Special Council, and they reported to the office of the President, last week.  Below are portions of their report as found on the Internet.

  Secretary Sebelius was Invited, in her Official Capacity as HHS Secretary, to be the Guest of Honor and Keynote Speaker at the February 25, 2012, Human Rights Campaign Gala. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is a private, nonprofit civil rights organization that works to achieve equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans.

 Every year HRC holds several gala events. This year, HRC invited Secretary Sebelius to speak at its gala in Charlotte, North Carolina. HHS considered the Secretary’s appearance at the HRC gala to be in her official capacity. Secretary Sebelius’ calendar and a briefing memo prepared by her staff identified the event as official. In addition, online invitations to the event referred to her as “Secretary Kathleen Sebelius” and “Secretary of DHHS Kathleen Sebelius.”
   The Secretary’s Remarks at the HRC Gala Advocated the Reelection of President Obama and the Election of Lt. Governor Dalton Prior to the HRC gala, the Secretary received a briefing memo. The briefing memo provided background on the event. The memo recommended ways to respond to certain
questions and suggested that if asked about her personal views, she respond by stating, “I’m here to represent the President and the Obama Administration, not in my personal capacity.” The briefing memo also contained eight pages of a speech outline, which was later displayed on multiple teleprompter screens while the Secretary delivered her speech. 

 Secretary Sebelius appeared at the HRC gala in her official capacity as HHS Secretary. As explained above, twice during the speech, Secretary Sebelius diverged from her prepared remarks. First, she endorsed the gubernatorial campaign of North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Walter Dalton and stated that it is “hugely important” to elect a Democratic Governor in North Carolina. Although Secretary Sebelius testified that she “had not intended to endorse him,” her words had that effect. Because she made this endorsement in her official capacity as HHS Secretary, she violated the Hatch Act.

 In addition, Secretary Sebelius advocated for the reelection of President Obama in a series of extemporaneous remarks. Secretary Sebelius suggested that the effort to defeat Amendment One on the ballot in May could serve as a “great template to do what needs to be done to organize people and turn out people for November.” She noted that North Carolina is critical in the next election and emphasized that it is “hugely important to make sure we reelect the President.” These statements were made in Secretary Sebelius’ official capacity and therefore violated the Hatch Act’s prohibition against using official authority or influence to affect the results of an election.

 Secretary Sebelius Violated the Hatch Act When She Gave Her Keynote Speech at the February 25, 2012, HRC Gala

Hatch Act violations can be firing offenses for federal employees, but it appears unlikely that Sebelius will be disciplined.  Statements made in an official role can not be reclassified after the fact, and they become public knowledge.  The bell was rung you can not unring it.

By the way, this is the woman in charge of Obamacare.  Will she be as open minded about "technical and minor" offenses  in the implementation of that law?

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/25/3046465/sebelius-rallies-lesbians-gays.html#storylink=cpy

An Example of the Federal Government's Work in Health Care

As a military retiree, I depend upon Medicare and TRICARE for my health needs.  As an introduction to TRICARE for those of you without a military background, I am including information from their web-site below.  Express Scripts manages the prescription portion of TRICARE.

From the official TRICARE web sites

TRICARE is the health care program for Uniformed Service members, retirees and their families worldwide.                 

         ..............

 TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) ensures, with the support of the Surgeons General of the Military Departments, that Department of Defense (DoD) policy on health care is consistently, effectively and efficiently implemented throughout the Military Health System (MHS). The TMA is an activity of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs)
 ...............

Express Scripts, in line with TRICARE Management Activity's commitment to the efficient management of the TRICARE Pharmacy benefit, has determined it will maintain the same robust retail pharmacy network of more than 57,000 pharmacies available to TRICARE beneficiaries. Walgreens will remain designated as a non-network pharmacy provider for TRICARE beneficiaries.

From MilitaryAdvantage.Military.com

Walgreens left the TRICARE retail pharmacy network when their contract with Express Scripts expired on December 31, 2011. On July 19, 2012, Express Scripts and Walgreens announced a new network agreement for Walgreens participation in one of Express Scripts networks. However, in line with TRICARE Management Activity’s commitment to the efficient management of the TRICARE Pharmacy benefit, Walgreens will remain designated as a non-network pharmacy provider for TRICARE beneficiaries.

It is my understanding that Walgreens is the largest pharmacy chain in America.  Up until last December we used them for our Rx medications.  They are close to our home, reliable, have 24 hour service in some locations and can be used almost anywhere we travel in the USA.  

What we now have is a pharmacy with set, shorter hours, is not national, and not nearly as convenient, yet was the best we could find beyond Walgreens.  "Non-network pharmacy provider" means I can use Walgreens, but pay the full amount, then must ask TRICARE/Express Scripts for a partial reimbursement.  I have lost my freedom of choice. Or, I have lost my prescription drug medical coverage. 

Let's Open Up a National Chain of Health Clubs, Non-profit of course.

 Below is an excerpt from Public Law 111-148, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act  More commonly called Obama Care.  I have underlined some items I find of special interest.  Looks to me like we should have a lot of people getting jobs.  I particularly like the part about "such sums as may [might] be necessary."

‘‘SEC. 399V–3. NATIONAL DIABETES PREVENTION PROGRAM.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary,[of Health and Human Services] acting through the Director  of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shall establish a national diabetes prevention program (referred to in this section as the ‘program’) targeted at adults at high risk for diabetes in order to eliminate the preventable burden of diabetes.

‘‘(b) PROGRAM ACTIVITIES.—The program described in subsection
(a) shall include—

‘‘(1) a grant program for community-based diabetes prevention
program model sites;

‘‘(2) a program within the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention to determine eligibility of entities to deliver
community-based diabetes prevention services;

‘‘(3) a training and outreach program for lifestyle intervention
instructors; and

‘‘(4) evaluation, monitoring and technical assistance, and
applied research carried out by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention.

‘‘(c) ELIGIBLE ENTITIES.—To be eligible for a grant under subsection
(b)(1), an entity shall be a State or local health department, a tribal organization, a national network of community-based nonprofits focused on health and wellbeing, an academic institution, or other entity, as the Secretary determines.

‘‘(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—For the purpose of
carrying out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2010 through
2014.’’.