Have you ever seen this YouTube Channel called “LiberalViewer“?
I personally would aspire toward having a blog more to the nature of the work of LiberalViewer in days to come.
See for yourself.
Mad as Hell about Health Care!
Mad as Hell Doctors
“This Fall, the rubber gloves meet the road.”
Find the MAHD on:
(Facebook)+(Twitter)+(YouTube)
_________________________________________________
Dr. Paul Hochfeld on Ed Schultz.
Quoting from MadAsHellDoctors.com:
You CAN handle the Truth
There’s no nice way to say it. The financial cost of health care is killing our citizens, hobbling our economy, crushing small business, and threatening the solvency of our government.
In the meantime, the Health Care Industry is spending almost two million dollars a day lobbying Congress and manipulating public opinion to accept “reform” legislation that leaves a vicious, for-profit system intact. The “public option” is a trap. We need real reform that finds immediate savings, controls costs, and accomplishes the moral imperative of true Universal Access.
A Single Payer plan is the only real path to a Health Care System that is socially, ethically and fiscally responsible. And yet, our elected officials refuse to even discuss the possibility of a Single Payer plan!
If that doesn’t make you mad, we recommend checking your pulse.
The “public option” is doomed.
First: we will still have a dysfunctional health care system designed around insurance companies.
Second: it will be impossible to cover everyone without raising taxes.
The Obama administration is already saying it is acceptable to leave out 15 million people. Which 15 million? Will you be one of them? Who gets to decide?
Third: in a “post-option” environment you can bet that the health insurance industry will manipulate the rules so that the sickest, most expensive patients will gravitate toward the public plan, which will cause it to fail. When it does, the opponents of real reform will point to the “public option” and scream: “See! Single Payer won’t work!”
There is a time for compromise – this isn’t one of them.
We believe there is only one way to control costs.
________________________________________________________
This issue and it’s seriousness is severely under-reported or completely propagandized in some media outlets.
Quoting Dr. Hochfeld from a radio-interview with Alan Colmes of FOX News:
“60% of doctors are in favor of government health insurance. The vast majority of primary care providers are in favor of it.”
“We are down to about 30% primary care providers in this country, we should be at about 50%. The more primary care providers you have, and the more resources you put into primary care, the better your health care outcomes and at a lower cost.”
“We are wasting 20% of our dollars on health care costs. It’s a threat to our security. We can’t afford to throw money at health care.”
“Once we get rid of the insurance companies we can have a health care system run by health care professionals.”
“The way ’single-payer’ works is we take the money we are now spending on health care .. 60% of this 2.4 trillion dollars is already going through the government .. instead of calling it ‘insurance premiums’ it’s just called ‘health tax’. It’s not more money, it’s the same money. Because we cut out the insurance companies, we actually get more for our health care dollars.”
“I’m mad as hell about the political process.”
“I think he [Obama] learned that the industry is far more powerful than he could ever imagine and our political process is far more corrupt than he could ever have predicted.”
____________________________________
This last quote is vital for me to point out.
I find it distrubing those on the left would find it easy to throw the man we elected to change things for the better down the stairs just because the system is broken.
That’s why we elected him.
Let the man work!
This is called ‘incrementalism’ and in my view President Obama should have just gone for the whole-nine-yards of single-payer but it’s looking like that’s not going to happen. Mostly because they are all corrupt in Congress and hyper-corrupt in the GOP so it’s just plain outside of the list of options before Obama.
Or at least that’s my take.
I support Mad as Hell Doctors and all those fighting for Universal Health Care.
My heart is with you. Let’s keep making this case until the establishment will finally listen.
Glenn Beck Revives McCarthyism
Please watch this video for an explanation of what McCarthyism is and how FOX News personality Glenn Beck is leading the charge of it’s revival in the US.
Jimmy Carter And The Race Card
“I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he’s African-American,” Carter told NBC News. “I live in the South, and I’ve seen the South come a long way, and I’ve seen the rest of the country that shares the South’s attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African-Americans.“
“That racism inclination still exists, and I think it’s bubbled up to the surface because of belief among many white people — not just in the South but around the country — that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It’s an abominable circumstance, and it grieves me and concerns me very deeply,” Carter said.
–
The oldest son of U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson, Alan Wilson, has come to his father’s defense in regards to a racial motivation to the uncouth interruption of President Obama during an address to a Joint-Session of Congress.
“There is not a racist bone in my dad’s body,” said Alan Wilson, an Iraq veteran who is running for state attorney general in South Carolina. “He doesn’t even laugh at distasteful jokes. I won’t comment on former President Carter, because I don’t know President Carter. But I know my dad, and it’s just not in him.“
“It’s unfortunate people make that jump. People can disagree — and appropriately disagree — on issues of substance, but when they make the jump to race it’s absolutely ludicrous. My brothers and I were raised by our parents to respect everyone regardless of background or race.“
–
I personally believe that former President Carter’s words were the absolute truth. I doubt that Rep. Wilson was motivated by a direct, personal hatred for Barack Obama based on his skin color but rather that he chose to be so disrespectful and chose to insult the nation in the way he did because of the exact principals that Carter touched on in the above quote.
The notion that Obama is not qualified to state facts as a President addressing the Congress and that one must not even hear out his entire address before rebuking him, is so outrageous and unheard of up until this point, that few other explanations remain. Joe Wilson continues to defend his un-American slander and claim that he was truthful in his statements when in fact he was, and is, completely misguided.
The notion that all strong resistance to Obama coming from the middle and the right is pure racism is also inaccurate, in my view.
However, the people who constantly use the argument that not everyone opposed to Obama is a racist are very often the same people who fail to point out the racists on the right and fail to be honest about the reasons for their outrage. Or they fail to give any rational explanation that makes any kind of sense for their intense fear and willingness to believe wild claims about Barack Obama.
Dick Cheney Fails To Understand American Values
Former Vice-President Dick Cheney continues to obfuscate the truth and tarnish the name of all Republicans by means of standing up for cruel and unusual punishment of military detainees.
Appearing on FOX News Sunday recently, the former Vice President continued to advocate a dangerous and sick agenda by claiming pride for the torture and prisoner mistreatment that occurred under The Bush Administration.
Beyond this outrageous fact, Cheney made a statement that I see as a direct affront to very heart of American Values like he has never done before.
CHENEY: “I am.”
–
This was a true testament to how divorced Dick Cheney remains from any understanding of our national standards of justice and our mutual values as a people.
Cheney clearly declares that he cares nothing as to the pursuit of justice to those that break the law under the blanket of authority claiming to pursue justice themselves.
This country does not accept any person or body to be beyond the law, and Cheney insulted this nation by supporting the notion that supporting illegal actions under government supervision are acceptable in a free nation of laws.
Obama Health Care Reform
This was an excellent Address on Health Care by President Obama. All significant issues were cogently addressed, but I found the president should have expounded further upon the specifics of the budget and the concept of “deficit neutrality.”
Perhaps it is my own failure in understanding but I do not fully understand this notion as it pertains to health care.
I also think this clear explanation was needed much closer to the onset of the national debate instead of at this point in time and also hopefully prior to the town hall debate setting, but I see the issue of Health Care Reform as being underlined and placed in the foreground.
Those who chose not to listen and refute every word Obama speaks will most likely continue to do so.
The issue of a ‘failure to sell‘ Health Care Reform and explain the proposal is put to rest, in my view.
Marble-Cake Federalism And Health Care Reform
In the midst of civil and uncivil protests against any type of reformist action on the medical insurance corporations and their stranglehold over health care options in the United States there has been a proposed amendment to the bill that I feel best represents the embodiment of liberty and American Values.
The Kucinich Amendment proposes that the federal option remains intact but each state would be allowed to elect into a single-payer system if they chose to do so.
We live in a system of government called Marble-cake Federalism where the federal government and state governments share powers over specific matters.
The best example being the issue of Gay-Marriage and the nature of how each state can decide for itself at this point if it is a legal practice or not, but if a federal law were to pass that either granted or denied the right to all citizens of the nation that would be nationwide legal practice from that point forward.
By granting a public option and in the same motion granting the state’s powers to establish a single-payer model is the best representation of Progressive Reformist action.
I would grant a lot more credit to the protestors of recent days to their commit to their cause and their willingness to do what it takes to heard, except for the facts that the values of non-violent protest seems to lost on far too many of their numbers and that the outright falsehoods coming from their mouths.
If there is a complete absence of logic and desired direction in any movement then ultimately there is one course in it’s direction: violence.
I understand a person if they speak about their fears about over reaching government powers into our lives. But I’m more interested to talk about The Patriot Act and The Homeland Security Department than I am to talk about a bill moving through Congress.
When the same group of people remained mute or even in support of expanding federalism when George W. Bush did it and then shout down their own representatives when they come to speak it becomes clear that some certain number of these people are just the most perverse of political partisans.
We the people do indeed need to find a way to take back the massive expanses in federal and executive powers but lacking a clear message beyond obstructionism of any government action regarding health care reform I am left to question the very motives of these protestors at their very core.
I also believe it to be true that a certain number of these people are paid-provocateurs working for the for-profit insurance agencies in order to make it appear that a vast majority of people support monopolies over the availability of health care in America.
America’s Affordable Health Choices Act
I remind you that this bill this not the final bill, which will ultimately require presidential signature to pass into law.
And that I’m not a journalist nor a lawyer.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. DINGELL (for himself, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. GEORGE MILLER
of California, Mr. STARK, Mr. PALLONE, and Mr. ANDREWS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on _____.
A BILL
To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009’’.
GENERAL DEFINITIONS.
PURPOSE.—
IN GENERAL.—The purpose of this division is to provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending.
BUILDING ON CURRENT SYSTEM.—This division achieves this purpose by building on what works in today’s health care system, while repairing the aspects that are broken.
INSURANCE REFORMS.—This division enacts strong insurance market reforms; creates a new Health Insurance Exchange, with a public health insurance option alongside private plans; includes sliding scale affordability credits; and initiates shared responsibility among workers, employers, and the government; so that all Americans have coverage of essential health benefits.
((“alongside private plans” means this most certainly is not a government takeover of health insurance. “sliding scale affordability“ means that lower income individuals on the government option will pay less, unlike private insurance plans.))
Subtitle A—General Standards
IN GENERAL.—The premium rate charged for an insured qualified health benefits plan may not vary except as follows:
LIMITED AGE VARIATION PERMITTED.—By age (within such age categories as the Commissioner shall specify) so long as the ratio of the highest such premium to the lowest such premium does not exceed the ratio of 2 to 1.
BY AREA.—By premium rating area (as permitted by State insurance regulators or, in the case of Exchange-participating health benefits plans, as specified by the Commissioner in consultation with such regulators).
BY FAMILY ENROLLMENT.—By family enrollment (such as variations within categories and compositions of families) so long as the ratio of the premium for family enrollment (or enrollments) to the premium for individual enrollment is uniform, as specified under State law and consistent with rules of the Commissioner.
((At this stage the bill puts a great many stipulations unto the Commissioner while retaining the existing powers of State law and insurance regulators.))
SEC. 142. DUTIES AND AUTHORITY OF COMMISSIONER.
DUTIES.—The Commissioner is responsible for carrying out the following functions under this division:
QUALIFIED PLAN STANDARDS.—The establishment of qualified health benefits plan standards under this title, including the enforcement of such standards in coordination with State insurance regulators and the Secretaries of Labor and the Treasury.
HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE.—The establishment and operation of a Health Insurance Exchange under subtitle A of title II.
INDIVIDUAL AFFORDABILITY CREDITS.— The administration of individual affordability credits under subtitle C of title II, including determination of eligibility for such credits.
IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner shall undertake activities in accordance with this subtitle to promote accountability of QHBP offering entities in meeting Federal health insurance requirements, regardless of whether such accountability is with respect to qualified health benefits plans offered through the Health Insurance Exchange or outside of such Exchange.
COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION AND AUDITS.—
IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner shall, in coordination with States, conduct audits of qualified health benefits plan compliance with Federal requirements. Such audits may include random compliance audits and targeted audits in response to complaints or other suspected non-compliance.
RECOUPMENT OF COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH EXAMINATION AND AUDITS.—The Commissioner is authorized to recoup from qualified health benefits plans reimbursement for the costs of such examinations and audit of such QHBP offering entities.
DATA COLLECTION.—The Commissioner shall collect data for purposes of carrying out the Commissioner’s duties, including for purposes of promoting quality and value, protecting consumers, and addressing disparities in health and health care and may share such data with the Secretary of Health and Human Services
SANCTIONS AUTHORITY.—
IN GENERAL.—In the case that the Commissioner determines that a QHBP offering entity violates a requirement of this title, the Commissioner may, in coordination with State insurance regulators and the Secretary of Labor, provide, in addition to any other remedies authorized by law, for any of the remedies described in paragraph
REMEDIES.—The remedies described in this paragraph, with respect to a qualified health benefits plan offered by a QHBP offering entity, are— (A) civil money penalties of not more than the amount that would be applicable under similar circumstances for similar violations under section 1857(g) of the Social Security Act; suspension of enrollment of individuals under such plan after the date the Commissioner notifies the entity of a determination under paragraph (1) and until the Commissioner is satisfied that the basis for such determination has been corrected and is not likely to recur;SEC. 2714.
ENSURING VALUE AND LOWER PREMIUMS.
IN GENERAL.—Each health insurance issuer that offers health insurance coverage in the small or large group market shall provide that for any plan year in which the coverage has a medical loss ratio below a level specified by the Secretary, the issuer shall provide in a manner specified by the Secretary for rebates to enrollees of payment sufficient to meet such loss ratio. Such methodology shall be set at the highest level medical loss ratio possible that is designed to ensure adequate participation by issuers, competition in the health insurance market, and value for consumers so that their premiums are used for services.
(“ensure adequate participation by issuers” is the key concept to understand.)
UNIFORM DEFINITIONS.—The Secretary shall establish a uniform definition of medical loss ratio and methodology for determining how to calculate the medical loss ratio. Such methodology shall be designed to take into account the special circumstances of smaller plans, different types of plans, and newer plans.The provisions of section 2714 shall apply to health insurance coverage offered in the individual market in the same manner as such provisions apply to health insurance coverage offered in the small or large group market.
IMMEDIATE IMPLEMENTATION.—The amendments made by this section shall apply in the group and individual market for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2011.SEC. 1173A. STANDARDIZE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE
TRANSACTIONS.STANDARDS FOR FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.—
IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall adopt and regularly update standards consistent with the goals described in paragraph (2).
(2) GOALS FOR FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSACTIONS.—The goals for standards under paragraph (1) are that such standards shall be unique with no conflicting or redundant standards; be authoritative, permitting no additions or constraints for electronic transactions, including companion guides; be comprehensive, efficient and robust, requiring minimal augmentation by paper transactions or clarification by further communications; enable the real-time (or near real-time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card; enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims; provide for timely acknowledgment, response, and status reporting applicable to any electronic transaction deemed appropriate by the Secretary; describe all data elements (such as reason and remark codes) in unambiguous terms, not permit optional fields, require that data elements be either required or conditioned upon set values in other fields, and prohibit additional conditions; and harmonize all common data elements across administrative and clinical transaction standards.
TIME FOR ADOPTION.—Not later than years after the date of implementation of the X12 Version 5010 transaction standards implemented under this part, the Secretary shall adopt standards under this section.
REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC STANDARDS.—The standards under this section shall be developed, adopted and enforced so as to— (A) clarify, refine, complete, and expand, as needed, the standards required under section 1173; (B) require paper versions of standardized transactions to comply with the same standards as to data content such that a fully compliant, equivalent electronic transaction can be populated from the data from a paper version; (C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice; (D) require timely and transparent claim and denial management processes, including tracking, adjudication, and appeal processing; (E) require the use of a standard electronic transaction with which health care providers may quickly and efficiently enroll with a health plan to conduct the other electronic transactions provided for in this part; and (F) provide for other requirements relating to administrative simplification as identified by the Secretary, in consultation with stake holders.
BUILDING ON EXISTING STANDARDS.—In developing the standards under this section, the Secretary shall build upon existing and planned standards.
IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT.—Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a plan for the implementation and enforcement, by not later than 5 years after such date of enactment, of the standards under this section.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The Sotomayor Hearings: Day One
Following is the prepared text of Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, as released by the White House:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank Senators Schumer and Gillibrand for that kind introduction.
In recent weeks, I have had the privilege and pleasure of meeting eighty-nine gracious Senators, including all the members of this Committee. I thank you for the time you have spent with me. Our meetings have given me an illuminating tour of the fifty states and invaluable insights into the American people.
There are countless family members, friends, mentors, colleagues, and clerks who have done so much over the years to make this day possible. I am deeply appreciative for their love and support. I want to make one special note of thanks to my mom. I am here today because of her aspirations and sacrifices for both my brother Juan and me. Mom, I love that we are sharing this together. I am very grateful to the President and humbled to be here today as a nominee to the United States Supreme Court.
The progression of my life has been uniquely American. My parents left Puerto Rico during World War II. I grew up in modest circumstances in a Bronx housing project. My father, a factory worker with a third grade education, passed away when I was nine years old.
On her own, my mother raised my brother and me. She taught us that the key to success in America is a good education. And she set the example, studying alongside my brother and me at our kitchen table so that she could become a registered nurse. We worked hard. I poured myself into my studies at Cardinal Spellman High School, earning scholarships to Princeton University and then Yale Law School, while my brother went to medical school. Our achievements are due to the values that we learned as children, and they have continued to guide my life’s endeavors. I try to pass on this legacy by serving as a mentor and friend to my many godchildren and students of all backgrounds.
Over the past three decades, I have seen our judicial system from a number of different perspectives – as a big-city prosecutor, a corporate litigator, a trial judge and an appellate judge. My first job after law school was as an assistant District Attorney in New York. There, I saw children exploited and abused. I felt the suffering of victims’ families torn apart by a loved one’s needless death. And I learned the tough job law enforcement has protecting the public safety. In my next legal job, I focused on commercial, instead of criminal, matters. I litigated issues on behalf of national and international businesses and advised them on matters ranging from contracts to trademarks.
My career as an advocate ended—and my career as a judge began—when I was appointed by President George H.W. Bush to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. As a trial judge, I decided over four hundred and fifty cases, and presided over dozens of trials, with perhaps my best known case involving the Major League Baseball strike in 1995.
After six extraordinary years on the district court, I was appointed by President William Jefferson Clinton to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On that Court, I have enjoyed the benefit of sharing ideas and perspectives with wonderful colleagues as we have worked together to resolve the issues before us. I have now served as an appellate judge for over a decade, deciding a wide range of Constitutional, statutory, and other legal questions.
Throughout my seventeen years on the bench, I have witnessed the human consequences of my decisions. Those decisions have been made not to serve the interests of any one litigant, but always to serve the larger interest of impartial justice.
In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law. The task of a judge is not to make the law – it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress’s intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court. In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand.
The process of judging is enhanced when the arguments and concerns of the parties to the litigation are understood and acknowledged. That is why I generally structure my opinions by setting out what the law requires and then by explaining why a contrary position, sympathetic or not, is accepted or rejected. That is how I seek to strengthen both the rule of law and faith in the impartiality of our justice system. My personal and professional experiences help me listen and understand, with the law always commanding the result in every case.
Since President Obama announced my nomination in May, I have received letters from people all over this country. Many tell a unique story of hope in spite of struggles. Each letter has deeply touched me. Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come to New York all those years ago. It is our Constitution that makes that Dream possible, and I now seek the honor of upholding the Constitution as a Justice on the Supreme Court.
I look forward in the next few days to answering your questions, to having the American people learn more about me, and to being part of a process that reflects the greatness of our Constitution and of our nation. Thank you.
***
The Washington Post has coverage of the live blogging from the hearings themselves.
Tracking The Stimulus Money
The most obvious choice for a tax-payer who is interested in learning more about the stimulus money and how it is being spent is Recovery.Gov.
There is also the addition of the website Recovery.Org to the mix.
But the most open-sourced transparency and best place, in my opinion, to address this issue while using the internet as a source would be at the George Mason Unversity’s Mercatus Center who recently released the website StimulusWatch.Org.
If you desire to take a more direct approach to tracking the funds you should visit ShovelWatch.Org.
Eric Lightborn