Milton Wolf on Election Day Tea Party

Dr. Milton Wolf promotes the Election Day Tea Party:



As the good doctor says, "The quickest way to stop the Obama big-government agenda is to pry the gavel out of Nancy Pelosi's hand."

More information at the official website.

More Commentary On Amendment 63

As the election draws closer, we've seen more commentary on the proposed Amendment 63 to protect health care choice in Colorado.

The September 30, 2010 Salida Mountain Mail published Linda Gorman's piece, "Amendment 63 protects right to spend money on your own medical care".

The October 3, 2010 Denver Post has a point-counterpoint segment on Amendment 63 including:

"Yes on Amendment 63: Stand up to D.C. on health care choice" by Jon Caldara and Linda Gorman.

"No on Amendment 63: It won't hold down health care costs", by Bob Semro.

The October 3, 2010 Boulder Daily Camera published Brian Schwartz's piece, "Amendment 63: Refuting the opposition".

Interview with Free Enterprise

Joshua Lipana interviewed me for the Phillipines-based Free Enterprise periodical. Thanks to Joshua for the opportunity to spread free-market health care ideas to his readers in the Phillipines!

Read the interview here. Here's the PDF version.

Hsieh PJM OpEd: "2010: Dawn of the Terran Empire?"

PajamasMedia has just published my short, tongue-in-cheek piece, "2010: Dawn of the Terran Empire?"

My theme is that we must have entered a bizarre political parallel universe if Democrats are now running on how they voted against universal health care, and France is now telling us that we're being too soft on our enemies.

Enjoy!

Why the MLR Rules Matter

The MLR (medical loss ratio) rules of ObamaCare are showing up more frequently in the news.

In the 9/29/2010 Forbes, Avik Roy explains "How ObamaCare May Disrupt Your Health Plan".

The 9/30/2010 Wall Street Journal shows how McDonalds insurance for employees may be the first casualty at, "McDonald's May Drop Health Plan".

Although many commenters call these "unintended consequences", there are undoubtedly many single-payer advocates who are cheering the demise of private health insurance -- so as to eventually force Americans into a monopoly government plan.

The Lobbying Heats Up

The 9/27/2010 Denver Post reports that, "Christian Scientists push for health insurance that covers spiritual care".

This is a completely predictable development. When the government specifies what benefits shall (or shall not) be covered by insurance, special interest groups will lobby ferociously to have their particular pet benefit be part of the mandatory package.

The result is that ordinary people are forced to pay extra for "benefits" they may neither need nor want in order to satisfy those with the greatest political pull.

As I discussed a few months ago in the 3/24/2010 Denver Post, this turns medicine into a permanent political football.

Quick Links: IT Consequences, MLR

The 9/27/2010 Wall Street Journal health blog discusses how, "Computerized Order Entry System Has Unintended Consequences". Expect to see more of this as physicians are forced to adopt government-approved health IT systems.

Why should you care about MLR's ("medical loss ratios")? John R. Graham of PRI discusses why in, "ObamaCare Will Dramatically Reduce Choice in Private Insurance".

More Mammography Brouhaha

The question of the value of screening mammography is in the news again.

Here is one typical article from the 9/22/2010 New York Times, "Mammograms' Value in Cancer Fight at Issue".

The abstract of the original paper at the New England Journal of Medicine is here at, "Effect of Screening Mammography on Breast-Cancer Mortality in Norway".

Of the various commentary I've seen, one of the best has been from the 9/23/2010 Wall Street Journal Health Blog, "Study: Mammograms Save Lives — Just Not As Many As Expected".

As NEJM co-author Marvin Zelen notes in the WSJ piece:

Zelen says women need to weigh the benefits of screening (a lower chance of dying from breast cancer, at least in this age group) against possible risks. As an accompanying editorial notes, those include false alarms and unnecessary biopsies, as well as the "less frequent but more worrisome" problem of needlessly treating cancer found via mammogram that never would have amounted to anything if it went undetected. If you take the approach of "minimizing the maximum risk," as Zelen says, that suggests being screened.

But "we have to make decisions about our health on the basis of what's important to us," he says.

That last point deserves highlighting.

Patients must have the freedom to decide for themselves (in consultation with their doctors) whether they wish to undergo certain tests and procedures -- or if the risk aren't worth it (in their opinion). Those decisions are intensely personal and no government agency can or should make those decisions for us.

Hence, people should be left free to spend their own health care dollars according to their own best judgment for their benefit based on their priorities and values.

This precious freedom will evaporate as ObamaCare is implemented. Instead of patients and doctors making these decisions according to the patient's values, they will be made by central committees enforcing "practice guidelines" dictated from above to doctors working in government-sanctioned "Accountable Care Organizations" and "Medical Homes". These decisions will be based on the government's values, not the patients'.

Do Americans really want the government making these decisions for them?

Haynes on the Doctor-Patient Relationship

Dr. Beth Haynes of the Black Ribbon Project has a great post on how ObamaCare will destroy the doctor-patient relationship.

Nor is this some "unintended consequence". Instead, it is the explicitly desired goal of men like Donald Berwick.

Read the full text of, "ACA intentionally undermines the Doctor-Patient relationship".

Faith-Based Propaganda

The Obama Administration further entangled religion and politics in this latest attempt to salvage his deeply unpopular health care plan.

Sarah Kliff at Politico reports, "Obama seeks divine intervention on health care":

With nothing else working, President Barack Obama is asking religious leaders to help him sell the public on health care reform.

POLITICO listened in to an Oval Office conference call Tuesday, where Obama and top administration officials, beseeched thousands of faith-based and community organizations to preach the gospel on new insurance reforms, chiefly the Patients' Bill of Rights.

"Get out there and spread the word," Obama told leaders from across the religious spectrum on the conference call, organized by the Health and Human Services Center for Faith-Based and Community Partnerships.

(Read the full text of "Obama seeks divine intervention on health care". Link via David Catron.)

His appeal to faith is not surprising, especially given that fact-based analysis of the law increasingly shows that "Obamacare is even worse than critics thought" (Washington Examiner, 9/22/2010).

Two quick comments:

1) I support the principle of separation of church and state. Hence, I think it's inappropriate for politicians of either major political party to attempt to enlist any kind of official religious backing (or opposition) to government policies.

2) I am also a supporter of abortion rights.

Hence, with respect to the Examiner OpEd, it is true that one serious problem with ObamaCare is that it compels people to pay for others' elective abortions against their will. But this is just an instance of the more fundamental problem -- namely that ObamaCare compels people to pay for all sorts of medical procedures (such as heart surgeries and colonoscopies) for others against their will.

Hennenfent on Death Panels

Dr. Brad Hennenfent has updated his blog post, "The 'Death Panels' are Real and They Exist Now".

He notes that the stealth rationing occurs due to government policy and "crony capitalism" (i.e., insurance companies acting as proxies for the government).

The quote by Dr. Kevin Pezzi on the problems of the government-run VA hospital system is especially worth reading. Here's an excerpt:

Anyone who values their life, or the lives of loved ones, should fear any healthcare system controlled by the government because the government excels at creating massive bureaucracies, such as those in VA hospitals, in which employees who are not doctors can overrule physician orders. No President or Congressman would have the guts to personally tell a doctor what he can and cannot do, but the need of politicians to control us is so strong that they create cold and uncaring bureaucracies to do the dirty work for them.

Who is on the short end of the stick when politicians ration care? Patients, who pay for that rationing with more suffering and an increased risk of death. President Obama tried to dismiss the notion of government "death panels" by claiming that he would create no such bureaucracy. He doesn't need to do that to achieve his objectives because every government bureaucracy in which doctors can be overruled by people who don't know what they are doing is functionally a death panel even though it is never labeled as such.

Quick Links: Avastin, Taxes, Thuggery

The FDA has delayed its decision on whether or not to ration the cancer drug Avastin until after the November elections.

ObamaCare levies a new 3.8% tax on the sale of your home.

Brian Schwartz covers the upcoming state-level thuggery here in Colorado over some insurers' plans to stop offering certain types of plans due to costly government regulations.

FIRM's Facebook Page

I recently created a fan page on Facebook for FIRM. If you're a fan, please spread the word about free market medicine by hitting the "like" button!



Also, you can find FIRM on Twitter here: @WeStandFIRM.

Zawistowski On Free Market Health Reforms

The Fall 2010 issue of The Objective Standard features an article on free market health care reforms by Stella Daily Zawistowski, "A Prescription for America's Health Care Ills".

Her article:

Compares and contrasts the cost, quality, and accessibility of government-regulated, rights-violating medicine with that of free-market, rights-respecting medicine and finds, once again, that the moral is the practical.

The introduction is available to all.

Subscribers have access for the full text. Interested non-subscribers can purchase the PDF for $3.95.

Armstrong Interviews Cassell

Ari Armstrong attended the 9/12 Tea Party rally in Washington, DC, and interviewed several participants, including Dr. Jack Cassell.

Casell is the Florida urologist who made national headlines by posting a sign on his office door after ObamaCare had passed saying, "If you voted for Obama, seek urologic care elsewhere".

The short segment with Dr. Cassell starts at 0:29:



In particular, Cassell notes that ObamaCare makes it impossible for doctors to uphold their Hippocratic Oath to their patients. And it will lower the life expectancy of the American people. He also expects that it will be "defunded", then eventually repealed.

Let's hope he's right.

Catron on Accountability

David Catron writes on "Accountability and Its Discontents".

He examines some of the leading theories by leftist pundits as to why America has turned so sharply against the current administration's policies:

...[A] variety of lesser liberal outlets have used their columns and posts to vent frustration with the electorate's inability to see that the current regime has been a success. Why, they ask, is the public not grateful for the "historic" health reform bill, the stimulus package and Wall Street reform? What, they demand to know, are the voters not getting?

Catron notes that they are blaming the voters -- for instance, blaming it on voters' seeming madness ("cognitive dissonance"), stupidity, or racism.

Of course, they seem to not even consider the possibility that the voters' concerns are justified -- that Americans don't want their freedoms infringed, that they don't want their hard-earned money spent on boondoggle make-work "stimulus" projects, and they don't want to support a system that punishes people who live responsibly, create values, and sustain the economy while rewarding those who live irresponsibly at others' expense.

And most critically, they don't want to be held accountable for the failures their policies have caused -- so they instead blame the voters for not "getting with the program".

Come November, we'll see another round of accountability as voters make their preferences known loud and clear.

Whether the "progressives" learn from that reality-check will be up to them. But given their bizarre "blame-the-voters" mindset, I won't hold my breath waiting.

OECD on Canada

Canada's socialized health care system is in trouble. Yes, I know you're all surprised.

Here are more details from the 9/14/2010 National Post, "OECD Prescription".

(Via Monica Hughes.)

Sissel Fights Back

Matt Sissel explains, "Health-care reform: Why I'm suing to get back my freedom" in the 9/13/2010 Christian Science Monitor.

Here's an excerpt:

I'm a healthy young man fresh out of art school. I'm starting a small business, based in Iowa City, as a fine artist specializing in realistic drawing and painting. I have limited means and struggle to achieve my modest dreams. Every penny counts in the service of my career goals, but the federal government is intent on slowing down my progress and the progress of every other productive man and woman in this country in its drive to socialize the American health care system.

As a business person, I intend to cover my own medical expenses, and I want the freedom and flexibility to do my own budgeting, including setting aside money for medical needs.

I don't want the federal government dictating my personal financial decisions.

It can't even run its own budget!

The closing is especially nice:

I proudly served our country in the Iowa Army National Guard as a combat medic, spending two years in Iraq and eventually being awarded the Bronze Star. I mention that experience in order to drive home this point: While I am proud to have served my state and my country as a volunteer, I object to being conscripted into a federal health-care program that is at odds with basic constitutional principles of individual rights and limited government.

I see my lawsuit as a battle for my liberty -- my freedom to live out my life to the fullest without costly, one-size-fits-all dictates from the government. I am fighting the command-and-control health-care plan in order to safeguard the health of our Constitution and the freedoms it protects for me and for all Americans.

Thank you, Mr. Sissel, for standing up for your rights!

Hsieh PJM OpEd: Get Ready For Your Health Care 'Re-Education'

The September 14, 2010 PajamasMedia has just published my latest OpEd, "Get Ready For Your Health Care 'Re-Education'".

My theme is that the government has started an Orwellian "re-education" program to get the public to embrace ObamaCare -- and Americans must respond by teaching our politicians a lesson this November.

One excerpt:

In effect, the government is saying: "Let's pretend we never said ObamaCare would lower costs -- even though that's how we sold it to the public." "Let's push patients into restrictive health plans -- and call it a 'medical home.'" "Let's label it 'misinformation' when insurers tell the truth about how our laws raise their costs -- and then punish them if they complain about it."

And as the problems of ObamaCare deepen, we can expect such "re-education" efforts to intensify.

(Read the full text of "Get Ready For Your Health Care 'Re-Education'".)

And thanks to Glenn Reynolds for the Instapundit link!

Thuggery Updates

Betsy McCaughey warns us, "Get set for big premium hikes". (NY Post, 9/13/2010).

Michael Barone notes, "Gangster Government Stifles Criticism of Obamacare". (RealClearPolitics, 9/13/2010).

The 9/13/2010 Wall Street Journal explains that "Sebelius Has a List". As they note:

What Ms. Sebelius really means is that the government will prohibit insurers from doing business if reality is not politically convenient for Democrats.

Sebelius' approach is the federal government's latest version of the old saying, "The beatings will continue until morale improves".