Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE Menu

Stakeholder Mistrust

Permalink:

Drug Pricing Is Weird

Stanley Feld MD, FACP,MACE

Many of my readers have asked me to explain drug pricing. I have not covered the pharmaceutical industry’s pricing in this blog because I have not been able to figure out drug pricing.

I do know there is a lot profit in both the retail and wholesale drug business. I know government pricing is different that benefit management pricing. I know there has been a growth in drug benefit management companies.

My sense is neither the pricing for Medicare Part D or private insurance drug benefits are for the patients’ advantage.

I recently asked a good friend Dr. Dale Fuller, a retired radiation oncologist, to explain the outrageous cost of oncology drugs (Drugs used to treat patients with cancer).

I wanted to know the reason the government pays almost twice as much to hospitals for the same treatment patients get in the oncologist’s office even though the treatment is given by the same oncologist.

I have added a couple of comments to Dr. Fuller’s note into the body of his reply.

 

Dr. Fuller writes,

 

"Is pharmaceutical pricing weird, or what?"

Dale Fuller M.D.

"Lately I have been thinking about pharmaceutical pricing, and as an old pharmacist turned radiation oncologist, it was the pricing of cancer drugs that caught my interest.

Then, my wife showed me some information about a product called “Symbicort” that she uses on a regular basis. 

Introduced into the US in March of 2009, it goes off patent in 2014.  The other day she brought home a 90 day supply for which she had paid $120.00, and Medicare part D allegedly paid $839.89.  At least, the package from Walgreen’s informed her that her “insurance had saved her that $839.89”.

The $839.89 plus the $120 or $959.89 is going to be charged against her Medicare Part D donut.

During the initial coverage phase, you pay a copayment or coinsurance, and your Part D drug plan pays its share for each covered drug until your combined amount (including your deductible) reaches $2840.

Once the patient and the patient's Part D drug plan has spent $2,840 for covered drugs, the patient will be in the donut hole.

Previously, the patient had to pay the full cost of your prescription drugs while in the donut hole.

Starting 2011, the patient gets a 50% discount on covered brand-name prescription medications. The donut hole continues until your total out-of-pocket cost reaches $4,550.

This annual out-of-pocket spending amount includes your yearly deductible, copayment, and coinsurance amounts.

When you spend more than $4,550 out-of-pocket, the coverage gap ends and your drug plan pays most of the costs of your covered drugs for the remainder of the year.

The patient will then be responsible for a small copayment. This is known as catastrophic coverage.

In 2014, Medicare will pay 28% of the price for generic drugs during the coverage gap. You'll pay the remaining 72% of the price.

What you pay for generic drugs during the coverage gap will decrease each year until it reaches 25% in 2020—in 2015, you'll pay 65% of the price for generic drugs during the coverage gap.

Confusing isn’t it.

 That would be a total of $959.89 for her 3 months’ supply of medication, or $319.96 a month, or $2.67 a squirt, of which there are four a day.  Who knows how much Uncle Sam actually paid Walgreen’s for his share of the bill.

 How to save 85% on Symbicort.

However a senior cannot buy this inexpensive brand named Symbicort using his Medicare Part D drug plan because he would be buying it from a Canadian Pharmacy.

So much for competitive innovation in a global economy. Government control trumps innovation.

Similar abstruse drug pricing strategies exist in abundance in the field of medical oncology.

Consider first the situation in the office of the medical oncologist.  The physician purchases pharmaceuticals from a supplier.  He must retain at least a basic inventory of frequently used products, some of which are very expensive.

The “acquisition cost” becomes the basis for the reimbursement the doctor receives from Medicare for the drug.  To the acquisition cost the doctor was allowed to add 6%, which was intended to cover the preparation for administration.

The actual infusion of the medication in the doctor’s infusion room, including the cost of the nurses working there, was reimbursed at a rate of $133 per hour (“chair time”).  Keep that figure in mind.

The US budget debacle in which Uncle Sam cut everything he paid for by 2%, actually amounted to a 33% reduction in the 6% the doctor was allowed,  leaving ~4% to underwite the preparation for administration of the drug required for the care of a Medicare patient.

There are other patients who come to the infusion room, as well.  Some have private insurance, and some have no insurance at all.

The private insurance may carry a different level of reimbursement for pharmaceuticals from that paid by Medicare, or it may not.

Very few uninsured patients have the wherewithal to pay out of pocket for the cost of their care.  The doctor has two choices in handling their situations:  charity or referral to a hospital where the cost of chemotherapy agents and their administration is handled in a different way.

The absence of any significant profitability for many medical oncologists has resulted in the closure of at least 400 practices between 2007 and 2012, and closures continue to this day.  Patients in these situations have been forced to seek outpatient infusion services in local hospitals, where administration reimbursement to the hospital is an average of $299 per hour in comparison to $133 in the doctors’ offices.

It is said that hospital outpatient infusion services use more drugs (see below for how they are acquired), charge higher prices, and require higher co-pays from patients.  Go figure.

And, don’t forget the drugs!  Doctors are now reimbursed by Medicare at acquisition plus 4%, while hospitals, under “340B” programs enjoy a margin of about 30% versus the doctors’ 0-2%.

Remember the Symbicort example I started with?  The 304B acquisition price for  Symbicort  is listed at $88!  Even with a 50% markup for a patient, a month’s supply would come to  $132. Go figure.

 The evolution of this mess has prompted a congressional advisory organization called MedPac http://www.medpac.gov/ to call for changes to equalize payments for oncologists’ care in their offices as compared to payments for services provided in hospital outpatient departments.  And, who can argue against the creation of a level playing field?

Symbicort is now generic. I tried to find the price of the generic drug. I could not without providing a prescription. Go Figure.  Is this transparency?

Patients and physicians are being taken advantage of here. They are the pawns that drive the profits in the healthcare system.

Someone has to stop it for the sake of good medical care delivery.

I wish to thank Dr. Dale Fuller for this submission.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

President Obama’s Hatchet Man

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP, MACE

President Obama’s favorite hatchet man is Paul Krugman. Paul Krugman has reinforced the Obama message in his most recent weekly article in the New York Times using Saul Alinsky’s tactics. He ridicules his opponents and Republicans in an attempt to marginalize their opinions.

Have you been following the news about Obamacare? The Affordable Care Act has receded from the front page, but information about how it’s going keeps coming in — and almost all the news is good.”

“What’s interesting about this success story (Obamacare) is that it has been accompanied at every step by cries of impending disaster.”

"Obamacare’s critics made at least six distinct predictions about how Obamacare would fail — every one of which turned out to be wrong."

The New York Times’ resident Nobel Prize winner has spoken.

Republicans have not figured out how to answer these statements by Paul Krugman for fear of losing votes in the 2014 election.

President Obama keeps telling us all these criticisms and accusations are phony scandals.

He says Republicans are the ones responsible for generating news of these phony scandals.

Once again Paul Krugman’s articles are fact-less.

He declares the enemies of health reform are 0 for 6.

“For reference: I count at least six distinct predictions of Obamacare doom made by the usual suspects (Republicans and conservative pundits), not one of which has come true. Here they are:”

Paul Krugman and President Obama’s enemies are in reality 6 for 6. Paul Krugman and President Obama are winless at 0 for 6.  

Paul Krugman and the President keep churning out fact-less information in order to keep the public misinformed. 

The evidence Paul Krugman uses to make his points about President Obama’s Obamacare follow. His “evidence” is incorrect on all six points.

 1Enrollment will be very low

Paul Krugman gives the critics one zero for being wrong about enrollment because enrollment was 8 million on March 31.

The real truth about enrollment is that of the fourteen million in the individual market seven million people lost their insurance.

The traditional media has portrayed it as showing a generally positive response to the healthcare law. They emphasized that about 6 in 10 of the enrollees were previously uninsured.

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius for the first time on May 1,2014  unveiled demographic details (PDF) about the more than 8 million people who have signed up for health insurance through state and federal exchanges.

The vast majority of those enrolling, 85%, received financial assistance. Those receiving assistance needed to report if they had insurance coverage prior to enrollment.”

5.2 million people applied for financial assistance through the federal exchange. Thirteen percent said they had coverage at the time of application without subsidies. 

Eight million people enrolled through the health insurance exchange and 7 million lost their insurance as a result of Obamacare.

This represents a gain of only 1 million insured.  This is not an impressive gain in insurance coverage.

We do not know how many people will lose their insurance in the group markets as large corporations are only hiring people to work less that 29 hours a week to avoid the corporations’ penalty resulting from the Obamacare mandate.

 President Obama delayed implementation of Obamacare in the group market by granting waivers to the group market for one to two years in order to avoid exposing Obamacare to an increase in the uninsured.

2. Even if people sign up, they won’t pay their premiums.

Reality: Signups exceeded expectations, and the vast majority paid.

The real truth is the closing of the enrollment period was delayed twice. The Obama administration paid millions of dollars in television ads and endorsements by celebrities encourage young people to sign up. Enrollees were not supposed to be counted as enrolled unless they paid the first month’s premium.

Sebelius should read her own agency's report. It states quite clearly that "it is important to note that the Marketplace plan selection data as of the end of the open enrollment period do not represent effectuated enrollment (e.g., those who have paid their premium)." 

Many who paid the first month’s premium have not paid their second month’s premium because they could not afford it. Even some subsidized enrollees cannot afford the premium.

Even worse, the HHS inspector general provided the first independent look at widespread issues the government is having effectively fact-checking the information applicants have put on their applications.

President Obama informed us that applicants lying on the website applications and receiving government subsidies for 2014 will be penalized on their tax return in 2015.

“According to the report, the administration was unable to resolve 2.6 million so-called "inconsistencies" out of a total of 2.9 million such problems from October through December 2013. 

“The government needs to determine applicants' eligibility in order to verify they can enroll and, in some cases, get government subsidies.”

Eighty-five percent of enrollees are receiving government subsidies. The report only covers people enrolled as of December 2013 when the total nuber of enrollees was only 3.5 million. 

“ Without that step (government verification), coverage could be jeopardized. Critics fear these issues also could cause chaos during the 2015 tax-filing season, as many would have to pay back subsidy money they were not entitled to.” 

According to the report, those running the federal marketplace are having trouble resolving problems of eligibility for subsidies. 

"The federal marketplace was generally incapable of resolving most inconsistencies," the report said, claiming the government could not resolve 89 percent of the problems

 So far Paul Krugman is zero for two.

 The American people will never know the truth because of the lack of transparency.

The truth does not matter to Paul Krugman or President Obama.

The media is the message. The American public is getting an untruthful message from the Obama administration through a non-critical traditional media. Wait until the taxpayers realize what the bill will be.

3. “More people will lose coverage cancelled by Obamacare than gain it.

Reality: Sharp drop in the number of uninsured.”

The real truth is there is something wrong with the Gallup survey of 3400 people. There are more people who lost insurance that had insurance previously when one compiles insurance policies lost as in section 1.

4. “Rate shock.

Reality: Like it says, affordable care.”

Paul Krugman should look at the Kaiser Foundation survey for the real truth.

Insurance premiums have only decreased for people making less than $50,000 because they receive government subsidies. The government pays the difference for those receiving subsidies.  

“Among plan switchers, 39% have higher premiums. In order to get the 46% number of switchers who had lower premiums, government subsidies had to be taken into account.”

According to the Kaiser report four in ten people in ACA-Compliant Plans say it is difficult to pay monthly premiums.

The majority of the Non-Group Enrollees (independent market) are confident about being able to pay for routine care with the high deductibles from the exchanges. They are less confident they will be able to pay the deductibles for a major illness.

 Obamacare is not affordable according to the Kaiser family foundation survey.

The Obama administration is heavily subsidizing people who are making less that $50,000 a year. The taxpayer is paying for the subsidy. It will be even worse for taxpayers when the healthcare insurance companies make less that their stated goal.

President Obama has by executive order put machinery in place to bail out the insurance industry to deliver the insurance industry’s expected profit at the taxpayers’ expense.

5.” Young people not signing up, and death spiral.

Reality: Pretty good demographics.”

These two references have nothing to do with the facts or the point Paul Krugman wants to make. He is pretty confident no one would read them the references.

“It’s still the case that just 28 percent of those sign-ups were between the ages of 18 and 34, far short of the administration’s target of 39 percent.”

The real truth is that the President needed 39% enrollment by young persons in order to make Obamacare financially viable in the individual healthcare insurance marketplace. President Obama ended up with only a 28% enrollment of young people.

Kathleen Sibelius announced that 28% was good enough.

6.” Soaring health costs.

Reality: Health costs are below anyone’s expectations.”

Does anyone believe the Obama administration when they tell us there is no inflation?  If you leave food and fuel out of the index there is no inflation. Food and fuel is what everyone buys and inflation is skyrocketing.

Health insurance premiums are also skyrocketing. Deductibles and co-pays are becoming unmanageable. The profits of the healthcare insurance industry unconscionable.

“Insurance firms participating in New York’s ObamaCare health exchange are seeking double-digit hikes for patient medical premiums in 2014.’

“Leading the charge is Excellus Health Plan, which is seeking to sock more than 24,000 customers with a 19.7 percent hike.”

“Health Republic Insurance of New York — the largest on the exchange with more than 68,000 members — requested a 15.2 percent increase for individual plans.”

Paul Krugman seems to have no interest in the facts.

Paul Krugman says, “It’s about politics and ideology, not analysis. But while this observation isn’t particularly startling, it’s worth pointing out just how completely ideology has trumped evidence in the health policy debate.”

Paul Krugman’s ideology trumps evidence. He is not even close to the truth. It is pure disinformation.

He is the one that is zero for six not his critics.

President Obama and Paul Krugman are concealing the truth about Obamacare’s failures.

What is worse is the traditional media and in particular the New York Times is letting them get away with it. 

What the public needs to do is obvious.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

Lies and Concealed Failures

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Americans are now certain that President Obama lies indiscriminately to them. He tells us what we want to hear. At the beginning of his quest for the presidency all Americans wanted to believe him.

Unfortunately he has been lying to us all along.

YouTube has given Americans the ability to easily review statements President Obama has made to see if he was deceiving us.  

His lies about Obamacare are now legend. What follows is a compilation of these lies.

 

http://youtu.be/4puS-yjwsiE

There are compilations of all the lies for each of the scandals including Fast and Furious, Bengashi, the IRS, and the VA among others on YouTube.

President Obama continues to call them all these scandals “phony scandals”.

To paraphrase Carl Sandberg, in his book Prairie Years, “if you tell a lie you better have a good memory.” I do not think President Obama feels he is obligated to have a good memory.  YouTube has made this point clear.

Since March 31, 2014 President Obama and his administration have tried to keep Obamacare out of the news. On March 31,2014 President Obama had declared Obamacare an overwhelming success. He declared there is no further need for the press to generate untrue controversy about Obamacare.

 

http://youtu.be/1YqXCFCXXL8

The mainstream media has complied with his request. It has been been silent about Obamacare’s ongoing failures.

In the last three months several reports have been published but never have reached the public through the mainstream media.

Americans may never get an accurate projection of Obamacare's impact on the deficit because the administration has not been transparent and or truthful about its impact.

Before Obamacare became law, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected, using figures given to it by the Obama administration, that Obamacare would cost $938 billion over ten years. The CBO also projected Obamacare would reduce the budget deficit by $143 billion over the first decade.

President Obama collected increased hidden taxes for the four years before Obamacare was supposed to be implemented.

Full implementation has now been delayed by five to six years while the increased taxes continued to be collected.

The delay in full implementation is the result of the unconstitutional waivers President Obama gave to some groups.

The original CBO estimate included a $780 billion reduction in Medicare spending cuts along with a double counting scandal.

In April 2014, the CBO said that the cost of the ACA from 2015 to 2024 would be more than $1.8 trillion — twice as much as its first ten-year projection.”

The addition of $1.8 trillion to the budget deficit as opposed to a $143 billion reduction is a very big difference.

In that same April report, the CBO include a significant footnote:

"CBO and (the Joint Committee on Taxation) can no longer determine exactly how the provisions of the (Affordable Care Act) that are not related to the expansion of health insurance coverage have affected their projections of direct spending and revenues. Isolating the incremental effects of those provisions on previously existing programs and revenues four years after enactment of the ACA is not possible."

“Also it is not clear that the law's proposed Medicare cuts will remain in place. Additionally, unions, insurers, drug makers and medical device companies each would like relief from the law's new tax provisions.” 

It was obvious to everyone that Obamacare would not reduce the deficit or decrease healthcare costs.

The bigger issue is none of this was reported in the traditional media. This represents one failure concealed from the American public.

Nonetheless President Obama is still telling Americans Obamacare will save money and reduce the deficit.

In President Obama’s victory lap on YouTube he states over and over again that Obamacare is a tremendous success.  It is almost as if he is pleading with the American public to believe him. 

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Please have a friend subscribe

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

Another President Obama Lie

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

 At the moment, ideology and political philosophy stands in the way of Repairing the Healthcare System.

President Obama believes in central control of the healthcare system. Central control of other healthcare systems has not worked to control healthcare costs while maintaining quality of care. The only possible exception is Switzerland’s healthcare system.

Each province in Canada spends at least 50% of its GDP on healthcare  according to the Frazier Report. The access to care is less than ideal. Healthcare spending is unsustainable in Canada

England is slowly switching to a private healthcare system.  

Obamacare has already demonstrated its inefficiencies and lack of cost control even though most of the population has received waivers from Obamacare for at least one year.

The trajectory of failure is not going to change until President Obama is out of office and the system changes to put the consumers in control of their health and healthcare dollars rather than having the government in control.

President Obama declared in 2010;

“Today, many insurance companies spend a substantial portion of consumers’ premium dollars on administrative costs and profits, including executive salaries, overhead, and marketing.  Thanks to the regulations, consumers will receive more value for their premium dollar because insurance companies will be required to spend 80 to 85 percent of premium dollars on medical care and health care quality improvement.   If they don’t, the insurance companies will be required to provide a rebate to their customers starting in 2012.”

Unfortunately, for Americans, President Obama tells us what we want to hear in a very seductive way and then does the opposite.

President Obama is always calling for someone to provide a new idea in order to fix Obamacare. His promise to the public is a good idea. However it is not reflected in the Obamacare regulations.

What is the meaning of Medical Loss Ratio?

The definition of medical loss ratio is the incurred claims received divided by premiums collected.

The healthcare insurance industry negotiated all the rules it wanted from President Obama and Kathleen Sebelius in defining incurred claims in the new Obamacare regulations. The rules contradict Mr. Obama’s promise to the American public.

The healthcare insurance industry is supposed to spend 85% of the premiums collected on direct medical care costs.

The remaining 15% of the premiums is for the insurance industry’s expenses and profit.  

The healthcare insurance industry claims it is lucky if it clears 3% profit under the Obamacare rules.

In order to encourage the healthcare industry to participate in Obamacare, President Obama pledged that the government would subsidize the healthcare insurance industry for any shortfall in profit.

A self-insured employer sponsored healthcare plan outsources the administrative services to the lowest bidding healthcare insurance company. The government outsources Medicare, Medicaid and Tricare (VA insurance) to the lowest bidding healthcare insurance company.

The Obama administration has included most of the healthcare insurance industry’s requests in the incurred claims (direct patient care) formula that is used to calculate the medical loss ratio.  

Inflating the incurred claims decreases the amount of money spent on direct patient care in order to maintain an eighty-five percent (85%) medical loss ratio.

If the incurred claims costs go up the medical loss ratio goes down. The potential increase in the medical loss ratio is the justification used by the insurance industries to increase premiums.

Obamacare requires insuring with a pre-existing condition. Insuring everyone with a pre-existing condition increases the insurance risk. Hence Americans experience double-digit increases in healthcare of insurance premiums.  

 The expenses the industry wanted included:  

1. The cost of verifying the credentials of doctors in its networks.

2. The cost of ferreting out fraud such as catching physicians over testing patients or doing unnecessary operations.

3. The cost of programs that keep people who have diabetes out of emergency rooms.

4. The sales commissions paid to insurance agents.

5. Taxes paid on investments.

6. Taxes paid on premium income.

7. Unpaid claim reserves associated with claims incurred.

8. Change in contract reserves.

9.  Claims-related portion of reserves for contingent benefit.

10. Lawsuits experience-rated refunds (exclude rebates based on issuers MLR.  

All these expenses are administrative expenses in my view. It is questionable that these should be included in direct patient care (incurred claims).

These expenses also increase a healthcare insurance company’s profit. Each incurred cost has a built in 15-20% profit.

As these expenses continue to be are permitted as incurred claims (direct medical care expenses), the resources available for direct medical care decrease from eighty-five cents to sixty cents on every premium-collected dollar.

At the same time people complain about the grotesque profits and salaries of those in the healthcare insurance industry.

Obamacare, contrary to President Obama’s promise, did nothing to solve this abuse.

It is almost as bad as the promise," If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. If you like your insurance plan you can keep your insurance plan.

The closest I could get to transparency and the distribution of one healthcare dollar to direct medical care is the following. 

Slide medical loss ratio 2

 

Fifteen cents goes to the doctor and twenty-five cents to the hospital. The remaining sixty cents goes to the healthcare insurance companies.

What are we paying for?

 

The definition of direct medical care according to Obamacare is:

 Definition of Medical Claims By Obamacare

Incurred claims = direct claims incurred in MLR reporting year + unpaid claim reserves associated with claims incurred + change in contract reserves + claims-related portion of reserves for contingent benefits and lawsuits +

experience-rated refunds (exclude rebates based on issuers MLR

Medical Claims and Quality Improvement Expenditures

As illustrated in Figure 1, increases in either medical claims or quality improvement expenditures (holding other factors constant) will increase

the MLR and reduce the likelihood of premium rebates to policyholders. Conversely, reductions in medical claims and/or quality improvement

expenditures (holding other factors constant) will decrease the MLR and increase the likelihood that insurers will have to provide rebates to policyholders.

Medigap plans (Medicare Part F) have separate medical loss ratio requirements. The healthcare insurance industry has to meet a 65% level for individuals and a 75% level for groups. It means that for every dollar in premium the individual has 65 cents minus incurred expenses coverage for direct medical care and for groups 75 cents minus incurred expenses.

Medigap plans, which are supplemental policies that Medicare beneficiaries can purchase to fill gaps in Medicare coverage, are not covered by the ACA MLR provisions.

Medigap plans are subject to their own separate MLR requirements, found in Title 18 of the Social Security Act; the MLR requirements are 65% in the individual marketplace and 75% in the group market.

Finally, the ACA’s MLR requirements do not apply to long-term care, dental, vision or retiree healthcare plans.

President Obama promised to fix these problems. He said,

 “Today, many insurance companies spend a substantial portion of consumers’ premium dollars on administrative costs and profits, including executive salaries, overhead, and marketing.  Thanks to the regulations, consumers will receive more value for their premium dollar because insurance companies will be required to spend 80 to 85 percent of premium dollars on medical care and health care quality improvement.    

He didn’t. He won’t.

He knows the problem. Fix it.

 If he did he would save Obamacare and tax payers a great deal of money. 

I am confident this suggestion will be ignored and at election time more false promises will be made.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

  

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

“Pick The Target, Freeze It, Personalize It, And Polarize It ”

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP, MACE

The Obama administration uses the same tactics over and over again to neutralize its critics. They are the Saul Alinsky tactics in “Rules For Radicals.”

President Obama has recieved critcism for he ideas and implementation of healthcare policy, education policy, foreign policy, energy policy, military policy and constitutional policy.

Last weekend I was asked to republish the summary of Alinsky’s tactics as a reminder to my readers.

These tactics will be used over and over again in this election year. They should be understood so that when used they are recognized.

It is suddenly relevant to republish the blog post as President Obama exchanged five imprisoned Taliban leaders for one American soldier.

A key point is that President Obama did not notify congress of the prisoners exchange as he was required by a law passed last year. He signed the new law.

The five Taliban leaders are terrorist devoted to the killing of Americans.

 A second key point is many of the soldiers in Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s platoon have accused him of being a deserter and a terrorist.

I am not sure Americans will ever know the truth.

However, the Obama administration’s Saul Alinsky tactic machine has started its work to disceidit these soldiers.

The administration have begun to criticize and accuse the troops in the platoon of being liars in an attempt to marginalize, personalize and freeze their testimony. The goal is to polarize the audience’s opinion by creating uncertainty and invalidating his follow soldiers testimony.

The front page of the New York Sunday Times has been used as the messanger. Bergdahl Was in Unit Known for Its Troubles”

"The platoon was, an American military official would assert years later, “raggedy.”

"They were known to wear bandannas and cutoff T-shirts."

" Beau Bergdahl was a misfit soldier in something of a misfit platoon that stumbled through its first months in Afghanistan. It might have made it too easy for him to walk away, as his fellow soldiers say he did."

 

  allowfullscreen></iframe> 

http://youtu.be/yh3RPh5Udr8

The New York Times story ommitted the fact that the military had these troops sign a non-disclosure agreement.

My February 23 2014 blog contains a summary of the Alinsky tactics. It also includes a debate between Dinesh D’Sousa and Bill Ayers at Darthmouth College in January 2014.

 

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

“Last week a reader sent me the link for the full debate between Dinesh D’Souza andBill Ayers at Dartmouth College on January 30 2014.

Dinesh D’Souza wrote, directed and produced 2016:Obama’s America in 2012’

 It is based on D'Souza's book The Roots of Obama's Rage (2010). Through interviews and reenactments, the film compares the similarities of the lives of D'Souza and PresidentBarack Obama as D'Souza presents his theory of how early influences on Obama are affecting the decisions he makes as president.

 The film has grossed over $33.45 million in the United States, making it the fourthhighest-grossing documentary (domestically) since 1982.

Those who didn’t see documentary can see it here for free.

Recently Dinesh D’Souza has been the subject of a recent IRS probe.

I had read about the debate but never had the time to listen to Bill Ayers.   Bill Ayers is an American elementary education theorist and a former leader in the counterculture movement that opposed U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.

He is known for his 1960s radical activism as well as his current work in education reformcurriculum, and instruction. In 1969 he co-founded the Weather Underground, a self-described communist revolutionary group that conducted a campaign ofbombing public buildings (including police stations, the U.S. Capitol Building, and the Pentagon) during the 1960s and 1970s in response to U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.

He is a retired professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. President Obama worked with and for in the 1980s and 1990s as a community organizer. 

 A reader sent me a link to the debate last week and I watched it. It is a worthwhile use of your time.

Obamacare cannot work improve the healthcare system. After listening to Bill Ayers and rereading Saul Alinsky’s thoughts on how to create a socialist state President Obama’s only goal is to control healthcare. If you control healthcare you control the people.  

According to Saul Alinsky there are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a socialist state.

"The first is the most important. 

1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people 

2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live. 

3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty. 

4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state. 

5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income). 

6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school. 

7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools. 

8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.'

 

Read more athttp://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/alinsky.asp#RGukF0aROOEmmdSO.99

 President Obama is using these tactics to control our country and drive it into being a socialist state.

President Obama combines these tactics with Alinsky’s rules for radicals.

Alinsky’s third rule is: “Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy.” Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat. He did this to Mitt Romney during his re-elections. Mitt Romney’s people did not know how to handle it.  

The fourth rule is: “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. “ You are free to act as you wish.

You can kill your opponent with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity

The fifth rule: “Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.” It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.

How many times have we seen the President and Vice-President try to ridicule their opponents? They use this rule often in domestic policy but are afraid to use it in foreign policy.

The eighth rule: “Keep the pressure on, “with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.

Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”  Doesn’t this sound familiar?

The ninth rule: The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself

 The eleventh rule : If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative. 

The twelfth rule: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. You cannot risk being trapped by the enemy in his sudden agreement with your demand and saying "You're right — we don't know what to do about this issue. Now you tell us."  President Obama is asking Republicans for constructive alternative that he ignores.

 If one studied the lies President Obama has told the public he has gotten trapped by his own pressure on his opponents and could not escape or change the subject.

I will have the most transparent administration in history.  It is not transparent at all.

TARP is to fund shovel-ready jobs. He finally had to admit the jobs were not shovel ready.

I am focused like a laser on creating jobs. Each month job growth was less which is the goal of a socialist society.

The IRS is not targeting anyone. Each cover up statement makes the lie worse.

If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan, period. This was never the intent.

Benghazi was a spontaneous riot about a movie. Something very bad went wrong here.

If I had a son… T Martin. Stirring racism. It was a mistake.

I will put an end to the type of politics that "breeds division, conflict and cynicism".This was never the intention.

You didn't build that! This was an attempt to make Americans uncertain about their achievement and way of life. It failed and President Obama’s credibility shrank even further.

I will restore trust in Government. All the obvious deception during President Obama’s times President Obama contradicts this statement.

However a good offense is many times the best defense. He tried but failed. Attacking FOX News is was not a good strategy as his credibility waned.

The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk. He never kept his word.

It's not my red line — it is the world's red line. You cannot step away from your commitments when people are depending on you.

Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration. This is another lie and empty promise.

We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest. This is an outright lie. He could not control the auditors. 

I am not spying on American citizens. This is a beauty!

Obamacare will be good for America. It has been very bad for America. It is going to get worse because Americans do not trust President Obama anymore.

Premiums will be lowered by $2500. Premiums have increased and taxes have been increasing. It has cost Americans much more that the $2,500 they were suppose to save.

People making less than $250,000 a year will not pay one dime more in taxes. This is totally untrue as the middle class is learning..

If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan Lie of the year.

It's just like shopping at Amazon. President Obama should have tried himself. I did it and it was tedious. If Amazon was like it I would never use it.

I knew nothing about "Fast and Furious" gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels. You should have known everything. You are President. If you didn’t know about Fast and Furious you were not doing your job.

I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups. You should know everything about IRS targeting. Who would make that decision?

I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi. You should know everything about Benghazi. It was reported to you instantaneously according to your own defense department. None of this is very transparent.

 "I, Barrack Hussein Obama, pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America."

In the light of Bill Ayers philosophy and in light of President Obama’s attacks on the constitution and the Bill of Rights, one could question if President Obama meant his pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”

 

Medical care in America is being destroyed methodically by the use of  Alinsky tactics. The physician-patient relationship is almost gone.

We will only know the effect these tactics have had on America after they have destroyed our institutions and our moral fabric unless we start understanding what is happening right now and demand that it stop.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

The VA Healthcare System-The Precursor Of Obamacare

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The VA Healthcare System scandal has been in the headlines for a few weeks. The scandal has brought out the fact, once more, that President Obama lied to the American people.

His excuses are very thin. He knew about the VA problems in 2005. He pledged to fix the problems before he was elected President in 2008. In 2011 he repeated his pledge.

Now he has the gall to tell the American public in 2014 that he didn’t know anything about the problems until he read about them in the press.

President Obama addressed the Veterans Affairs scandal on Wednesday, saying he's waiting for an Inspector General "audit" of what went wrong.

How stupid does he think we are?

President Obama probably wishes he had control over You-Tube and the Internet. He could then eliminate his past statements and promises.

It looks like he is trying his best by attempting to defeat Net Neutrality.

Liberals have long hailed the VA Healthcare System as the model of government health care.  Liberals believe everything the government runs is the best thing for America.

Can you think of anything that the US government runs works really, really well? 

If so, please share that information with the rest of us. 

How can it run a healthcare system?

The government has systems problems in everything it tries to run. It can publish mountains of regulations. It cannot execute much because of the way the systems have been set up or not changed over time. There are multiple examples of such failures of execution.

None of these agencies seem to work including the Post Office, Amtrak, FEMA (Katrina rescue), Obamacare (website or the health insurance exchanges), and even the government itself.

 I believe it is because government has imbedded in it a deadening bureaucracy.

The bureaucracy suppresses innovation and the ability to repair defects quickly as they occur. This leads to cover ups that are eventually leaked.

The fact that no one is ever held responsible for errors of execution just adds to the awkwardness of the cover up.

The recent scandals, Benghazi, the IRS, Fast and Furious and the reporting on Obamacare, are a few examples of this.

The press never shows us facts about the supposed “investigations” and who was responsible for the missteps. It only leads to more mistrust and suspicion.

The forced resignation of VA Secretary Eric Shinseki will not serve as a distraction from the real problems in the VA.  Eric Shinseki’s firing is not going to fix the VA’s Healthcare System’s problems.

 

http://youtu.be/eBc8ag-fS3s

Liberals are blinded by their ideology. They have long hailed the VA as the model of government health care. They ignore the facts. The VA Healthcare System’s problems have been around for a long time.  

There is little evidence that President Obama has tried to do anything about the VA Healthcare System since he became President.

 All the public heard is how great the VA system of healthcare delivery is and how his administration is going to make it better.

Paul Krugman is the chief purveyor of the Obama administration’s progressive ideology. Mr. Krugman’s problem is he ignores facts as he formulates his “socialistic” beliefs.

It is almost as if he is saying, “don’t confuse me with facts.” Just believe that I know what I am talking about because I am a Nobel Prize winner.

The crazy thing is many very smart people believe him, just as they believe President Obama.

Paul Krugman praised the VA as a triumph of "socialized medicine."  He even listed what's behind this success.

“Crucially, the V.H.A. is an integrated system, which provides health care as well as paying for it.”

“So it's free from the perverse incentives created when doctors and hospitals profit from expensive tests and procedures, whether or not those procedures actually make medical sense."

The progressives ignore the government system’s own “perverse incentives.” The most important is as VA bureaucrats they must cover their own backside for non- performance.

It leads to long treatment delays and deaths that are preventable. This is only the tip of the iceberg. The rationing of care has been devastating for those veterans awaiting appointments.

 The bureaucracy is forced to cover up the errors. The problem the bureaucrats have is free speech in America. The morality of some is drives them to tell the rest of us about the problems.

“VA centers fudge their data.” The VA has consistently boasted in its performance reviews that more than 90% of patients receive appointments within 14 days of their "desired date."

The hidden waiting lines and treatment delays are not the only problems.

Infection rates and poor treatment outcomes have also been hidden from other bureaucrats in the system as well as the public. These problems are as important or more important than hiding appointment lists.

"The rate of potentially lethal bloodstream infections from central-intravenous lines was more than 11 times as high among patients at the Phoenix facility than it was at top VA hospitals, data from the year ended March 31, 2014, show," notes the Journal.

"Those infections, called sepsis, can quickly cause multiple organ failure and kill an otherwise relatively healthy patient within days or even hours. The data don't show what percentage of patients died as a result."

 The Journal also reports, "Among patients admitted to the hospital for acute care, the Phoenix VA Health Care System had a 32% higher 30-day death rate than did the top-performing VA hospitals, a finding flagged as statistically significant by the agency's medical analysts."

William E. Duncan, supervised publication of VA Healthcare Systems medical outcomes until his 2012 departure.

He said in an interview that he urged that more data be posted regardless of the impact," adds the Journal. But he tells the paper that he was forced out of the VA amid a dispute over the issue.”

President Obama has said all we need to do is throw more money at the problem.

Wrong!

President Obama needs to fix the defects in the VA Healthcare System’s business model.

Inherent in the present VA Healthcare System business model is a system of misallocation of resources and inefficiency. Resources are allocated by political force rather than individual consumer choices.

This is true in most socialistic systems.

It is all about who you know. It is not about who are the most innovative, creative or truthful people trying to execute a system for the consumers’ benefit.

Obamacare's ultimate destination is the same as the VA Healthcare System.

It is going to happen by President Obama’s design. The government will completely control America’s healthcare system. The transformation is happening slowing by design to avoid protest. President Obama doesn’t care about the cost or creating a more efficient system.

He is doing it the same way you cook a live frog. He is raising the temperature one degree at a time. The frog will never notice the heat until he is cooked.

It is time for America to wake up!

We cannot take it any more.

America must demand that we change the business model NOW!

Repeal Obamacare now. 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

Doctors’ Salaries; The Media Is The Message

 Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE   

 Physicians’ salaries are not the cause of the escalating healthcare costs.

The economic factors involved are complex.  The escalating costs result from cost shifting, government regulations and the lack of tort reform. The result is each stakeholder tries to optimize his stake in the dysfunctional healthcare system.

Further dysfunction occurs in reaction to the individual stakeholder’s attempts at optimization. The costs escalate.

The government permits insurance companies and hospital systems to calculate expenses and profits in strange ways.

Physicians’ socio-economic interests have the weakest representation in the healthcare ecosystem.  The lack of representation allows physicians to be the easiest stakeholders to blame for healthcare’s rising costs.  

As always the media is the message. The traditional print media are desperate to print anything that will capture the attention of the public and sell newspapers.

The Dallas newspaper published a story a few weeks ago titled “North Texas Medicare Millionaire Doctors.” and asks the public,

Is your doctor one of the 340 in Texas to make more than $1 million from Medicare?”

 

     
     

"More than 340 doctors and other care providers in Texas received over $1 million each in 2012 under the government’s Medicare health insurance program, according to data released Wednesday that provides the public its first inside look at physician billing practices."

CMS released the Medicare database to inform the public what physicians and physician groups are charging Medicare.

Doctors over 1 million dollars
 

The data reflects payments made by Medicare.

The data does not

  • reflect whether one physician identifier number is included in the billing for multiple providers.
  • reflect the charges and payment for a service.
  • reflect if it was physically possible for the individual named to perform all the services implied.

It lets the reader imagine that the providers “physicians” are crooks as well as a millionaires.

It then follows that most physicians must be crooks.

There is nothing to be learned from the data as presented. This data must go through many layers of dissection in order to mean anything.

However, “the media is the message” and the point was made.

The bad thing is many of these articles with their imbedded implied conclusions are written from press release information provided by the government. This is called "government induced disinformation."

Reality is much different. Physicians are the most highly trained workers in the healthcare system. Without patients and physicians a healthcare system would not exist. What is the individual physician’s salary? What is he/she worth? These questions are the real questions.

Physicians have seen their incomes fall, their clout with insurers shrink, and their practices weighed down by a plethora of new requirements.

Physicians are starting to wake up and realize that all this is the direct result of them being exploited by payers, hospitals, policymakers, government and other groups that have become more powerful than the medical profession.

The example of the disinformation generated by the implications of the millionaire physicians ripping off the public is just one example of this exploitation of the medical profession.

The other stakeholders are doing this to deflect attention from how they are ripping off the healthcare system.

‘That is because the biggest bucks are currently earned not through the delivery of care, but from overseeing the business of medicine.”

“The base pay of insurance executives, hospital executives and even hospital administrators often far outstrips doctors’ salaries, according to an analysis performed for The New York Times by Compdata Surveys.”

The survey shows that the average salary for  

  • An insurance chief executive officer is $584,000
  • A hospital C.E.O. $386,000
  • A hospital administrator $237,000,
  • Compared to an surgeon  $306,000
  • And an average general doctor $185,000 .

  This is an interesting payment gap. These secondary stakeholders do not add value to direct patient care.

The salary gaps between secondary stakeholders get worse because these numbers represent only the average base salaries.

The basic question is what are these executives worth?

What encourages a board of directors of their organizations to award these high salaries?

What in the government tax structure and regulations encourage these high salaries?

“And those numbers almost certainly understate the payment gap, since top executives frequently earn the bulk of their income in non-salary compensation. 

Mark T. Bertolini, the chief executive of Aetna, earned a salary of about $977,000 in 2012 but a total compensation package of over $36 million, the bulk of it from stocks vested and options he exercised.

Ronald J. Del Mauro, a former president of Barnabas Health, a midsize health system in New Jersey, earned a salary of just $28,000 in 2012 the year he retired, but total compensation of $21.7 million.

 These two minor examples are appropriate. These are also low-end examples. There are many more.

 The Wellpoint and United examples are more stunning.

 Sources: Compdata Surveys (salaries); the Commonwealth Fund and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (administrative costs)

Physicians are waking up. They are starting to step forward and are pointing out the real abuses in the healthcare system.  

“Doctors are beginning to push back: Last month, 75 doctors in northern Wisconsin took out an advertisement in The Wisconsin State Journal demanding widespread health reforms to lower prices, including penalizing hospitals for overbuilding and requiring that 95 percent of insurance premiums be used on medical care.

The movement was ignited when a surgeon, Dr. Hans Rechsteiner, discovered that a brief outpatient appendectomy he had performed for a fee of $1,700 generated over $12,000 in hospital bills, including $6,500 for operating room and recovery room charges.

Keith Smith M.D. in Oklahoma City has done it. His surgical center is doing surgery for 25-40% less than the typical hospital whose costs are bloated by administrator salaries and bureaucracy that add no value to direct patient care.
 

Somewhere there is a corporation that is self –insured and will set up an Ideal Medical Savings Account for its employees that will by-pass all the bloated bureaucracy and large salaries of the healthcare insurance industry.
It will result in a decrease in cost and a user-friendly healthcare system.

The generation of a consumer driven healthcare system will begin. All President Obama has to do is get out of the way.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

Keeping Obamacare Out Of The News

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

President Obama has tried to keep the bad news about Obamacare from us.  The bad news concerning errors in design and execution are being recognized daily. The administration has not published the demographic figures of those who enrolled in Obamacare yet.

It is going to be impossible for the administration to keep Obamacare implementation errors out of the news. Even the traditional media, big Obamacare fans, are starting to realize the huge defects in Obamacare and the hardships it is about to bring.

The defects are becoming obvious because they are affecting the majority of the working middle class signed up through the health insurance exchanges. 

Bureaucracy has created evaluation of care panels. While the panel members, most of them clinicians, agreed that a study could be impressive in its implementation and results, they have concluded that some studies were not good enough to recommend a new coverage policy to the CMS.

The members of the committees are usually not the most expert in the field they are evaluating. Thus, access to care through government coverage is denied when it should not be.

I previously gave the example of Medicare’s discussion to not pay for lung cancer screening even though the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force made the following recommendation based on their review.

"Smoking-related lung cancer kills about 130,000 Americans each year. The five-year overall survival rate for lung cancer patients in the U.S. is 16.8%. That low rate has been attributed to the late stage of diagnosis for the disease. The Preventive Services Task Force estimated that as many as 20,000 lives could be saved each year if its recommendation was fully implemented."

The USPSTF is not the ultimate authority in my view, but even using it as the ultimate authority Medicare ignores its recommendation because of the cost burden.

The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) has touted Preventive Services.

What is the meaning of Preventative Services?

I guess it is to prevent diseases from occurring.

I believe if we could prevent obesity, stop cigarette smoking and alcoholism we could prevent a lot of diseases from occurring.

However, patients are the only ones' who can only prevent these diseases from occurring.
 

If we could genetically type diseases and alter those genes we could prevent the disease from occurring. This would relieve individuals of their own responsibilities.

The government defines Preventive Services as identifying disease by screening for disease in people who have no signs or symptoms of disease. 

The idea of screening patients for diseases is to make the diagnosis early enough in a disease process so that when treated early patients can be cured. 

In other words, a 40 year- old woman can have a free screening mammogram.

If the same woman notices a breast lump by self-examination and goes to her doctor to have it evaluated, she’ll pay for a diagnostic mammogram.

The mammogram can be as much as $300. With a high deductible Health Insurance Exchange plan she would pay out of her pocket because of the high deductible.

It means that a woman with no breast lump and at lower risk for cancer has incentive to be tested because it is free while the woman with a lump at higher risk of cancer faces financial disincentive to get a mammogram.

Isn’t that a little crazy? That’s the problem with giving patients things for free under different circumstances.

Subsequent interventions are an integral part of all screening. Were I a mammographer, I’d happily argue that additional mammographic views, ultrasounds, M.R.I.s and breast biopsies are all part of screening.”

This decision should not be made by the by a committee of non-experts. Individual patients should make these decisions after discussion with their physicians.

This is a defect in the bureaucratic definition of Preventative Services. Should the government provide the entire work up free?

A crazier example is a 50 year old undergoing a screening for colon cancer.

If a patient had a fecal test for occult blood for screening for colon cancer and it was positive, the patient would have to have a colonoscopy. Occult blood screening is inaccurate. It is cheap and free. It has a lot of false positives.

If the patient had an initial colonoscopy for screening it would also be free according to the Obamacare rules.

If during a colonoscopy a polyp were found the screening test would be reclassified as a diagnostic test. If it were a diagnostic test patients would have to pay for it. It would be an out of pocket expense for the patient on Obamacare making over $50,000 a year.

The outcry caused the government to change the rule. The polyp biopsy would be part of the colonoscopy and still be free to the patient. Do not forget someone is paying for it.

Medical decisions should not be made by government rules. Patients should make the medical decisions for themselves with the advice of their physicians.   

If patients had control of their health care dollars with the ideal medical savings account they would become true consumers of healthcare.

Patients would become responsible for making the decision on when to screen and what diagnosis to screen for and how often to screen for disease.

Patients would have to have the information to make those decisions. With the state of the information available and their physicians’ help responsible patients can make those judgments.

Patients have to drive the healthcare system. The government should be concentrating on setting up systems to teach patient how to be educated purchasers of healthcare.

The confusion created by confusing and ever-changing rules puts an emotional and a financial burden on all stakeholders.

Some use the argument that patients are not smart enough to be responsible for they health and healthcare dollars. It is their reason for totally free healthcare for all.

I believe this is disrespectful to our intelligence and our ability to learn to survive.

Paul Krugman a devoted liberal/progressive has shown little respect for the average Americans’ intelligence.

In my view Paul Krugman has been wrong about almost everything. He writes articles of opinion for the New York Times that are not based on any facts.

In 2011 he wrote an article  “The VA Is A Huge Policy Success Story’

Paul Krugman wrote;  “The V.H.A. is a huge policy success story, which offers important lessons for future health reform.”

And yes, this is “socialized medicine”.  But it works — and suggests what it will take to solve the troubles of U.S. health care more broadly.

Where is Paul Krugman’s evidence?  The VA healthcare system didn’t work in 2011 and it doesn’t work today. The VA produces nice reports that do not have anything to do with reality.

There is much to write about the recent VA problems.  I promise to get to these problems shortly.

The lessons to be learned from the VA’s problems are these problems a precursor to the Obamacare problems.

I fear this is what the American public is going to be facing as the Obama administration tries to implement Obamacare.

Obamacare is a terrible business model. America cannot afford this business model that is destined to failure.

A effective business model is needed which will be advantageous for all the stakeholders must replace it.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.

Permalink:

What Is Net Neutrality?

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Net neutrality is the idea that broadband operators shouldn't be allowed to block or degrade Internet content and services–or charge content providers an extra fee for speedier delivery or more favorable placement.

In November 2011 I wrote about the government attempt to control the Internet Protect IP Act (PIPA – S.968) and Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA – H.R.3261).

  The title of the article was “The Government and American Censorship: 1984 in 2011.”

I searched the New York Times to see what the newspaper that (“Prints all the news fit to Print”) had to say about the bills. My search produced this reply.

 Your search – Protect IP Act (PIPA – S.968) and Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA – H.R.3261). – did not match any documents under All Results Since 1851.

 The most vital part of our economy and job growth at the moment is the Internet. These two bills will destroy this monumental jobs creating machine.

 It is another piece of lunacy brought to you by our federal government. I wonder how many Representatives and Senators have read the bills.

There are two very disturbing bills making their way through Congress: These bills are coated in rhetoric that I find disgusting since at their core they are online censorship bills. It’s incredible to me that Congress would take seriously anything that censors the Internet and the American public but in the last few weeks PIPA and SOPA have burst forth with incredibly momentum, largely being underwritten by large media companies and their lobbyists.”

 Let me remind everyone that large media companies offered huge support to President Obama and the Democrats in congress. These bills are congruent with the large antiquated media”s vested interest and President Obama’s goal of central control over our lives.

EFFFree Software FoundationPublic Knowledge, Progress, Fight, Participatory Politics Foundation, and Creative Commons in support of free speech and a free and open Internet are opposing the bills and have organized American Censorship Day for tomorrow (11/16/11). The goal is to make every American aware of this new trick play and stop this lunacy.

 This video does a great job of explaining the two bills’ potential primary and secondary impact. I do not believe our congressional representatives understand the impact of the bills.

Someone is trying to railroad passage through congress.

 

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

Both failed to pass in congress because of the overwhelming outcry by the technology community.

President Obama promised the American public he would issue regulations through executive orders and agency powers to enact laws that congress failed to enact.

When President Obama was running for president in 2007 and 2008 he was a strong proponent of Net Neutrality.

At that time President Obama was asked: "Would you make it a priority in your first year of office to reinstate Net neutrality as the law of the land? And would you pledge to only appoint FCC commissioners that support open Internet principles like Net neutrality?"

"The answer is yes," Obama replied. "I am a strong supporter of Net neutrality."

The White House announced: President Obama is strongly committed to Net Neutrality in order to keep an open Internet that fosters investment, innovation, consumer choice, and free speech.  The announced action by FCC Chairman Genachowski, building on the work of Chairman Waxman's collaborative effort to craft legislation in this area, advances this important policy priority. 

 

http://youtu.be/-Lz-bPHojVE

 <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/mP01t0Z4Hr8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

http://youtu.be/mP01t0Z4Hr8

 

In 2014 President Obama hires a lobbyist Tom Wheeler who is a former telecommunication lobbyist. Mr. Wheeler is opposed to Net Neutrality. The president has the FCC issuing regulations that oppose Net Neutrality and transfer great power and a complex bureaucracy to the federal government.

 It represents another broken promise by President Obama.

“Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler went ahead with his proposal on Thursday to give his agency the power to decide whether the terms and prices of broadband Internet services are "reasonable."

 

 

http://youtu.be/km1AhFkt4Dk

This is another power grab by the central government to have control of the Internet. The concept is once again not covered by the traditional media in an understandable way.

As a reaction to satisfy the “Net Neutral” community Mr. Wheeler said the goal is not to have a fast and slow speed Internet no matter how much broadband they consume.

Mr. Wheeler said he prefers the "reasonable" pricing standard. But he also suggested another, even worse option to regulate broadband prices: reclassifying Internet connections as "telecommunications services."

A reader of my blog wrote, "Can you think of anything that the U.S. government does really, really well?" 

“For two decades Congress has wisely refused to give the FCC the same power over the Internet that it holds over the telephone system. And for two decades the Internet has enabled a gusher of creativity that was unimaginable over a century of regulated telephony. “

Regulators from every state will also be able to get into the act. I cannot imagine it will be regulated for the benefit of consumers. There is something strange about all the telecoms companies merging with each other in the past few months.

“Mr. Wheeler's brainstorm to change all this is simply to pretend the Internet is a phone network.”

Since this designation would automatically impose myriad obligations that have nothing to do with current customer needs—and that many modern firms could not possibly fulfill—the commission would then have to issue a flurry of exemptions ("forbearance" in FCC parlance) to prevent chaos in the market for Internet connections.

The FCC is inventing an Obamacare for the Internet. It is enacting an unworkable system upon a system (the Internet).  Then the FCC will have to get busy issuing waivers which will prevent the new system from operating as it was theoretically designed to operate.

 The telecommunication industry will have a field day at the expense of the public.

“GOP Commissioner Michael O'Rielly, who also dissented, notes that the FCC's net-neutrality campaign "rests on a faulty foundation of make-believe statutory authority."

Imagine all the costs, confusion, lawsuits, legal fees, and regulations that will occur to restrict the freedom of the internet and all the innovations in commerce the Internet has created.

The elimination of Net Neutrality is all about increasing government power, restricting individual freedoms and shifting the costs of government’s inefficient control on to consumers.

Anna Eshoe is the ranking Democrat on the Communications and Technology Subcommittee.  She has pointed out that the new FCC wording has not fooled Silicon Valley entrepreneurs.

 Like many Internet users, I fear that the latest round of proposed Net Neutrality rules from the FCC will not do enough to curtail discrimination of Internet traffic, but rather leave the door open to discrimination under more ambiguous terms.”

The new regulations diminish Net Neutrality while empowering government bureaucracy. The online gatekeepers threaten free speech, harm competition and diminish the continued openness of the Internet. The proposed regulations do not protect the freedoms and available to  consumers and businesses in a Net Neutral environment.

Barack Obama promised in the 2008 and 2012 campaigns that he would enforce Net Neutrality. He has not kept that promise.  

The affect on Americans’ freedoms will be as bad or worse than Obamacare.

Please write to your congressmen and President Obama and ask them to preserve Net Neutrality.

Thank you

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

  • Thanks for leaving a comment, please keep it clean. HTML allowed is strong, code and a href.