Posts Tagged ‘National Health Care’

I posted a comment on this Press Release a few days ago. It was also published in the Platte County Landmark as a letter to the editor Thursday. I thought it would be pertinent to go ahead and post the Press Release. I just want to reiterate the fact that Dr. Schaaf’s decision to leave the AMA was greatly appreciated!

St. Joseph, MO–In response to the endorsement by the American Medical Association of the Senate Health Bill, Missouri State Representative Rob Schaaf, M.D., a practicing family physician, is dropping out of the AMA and urges fellow physicians to do the same.

“The AMA has ignored the best interests of patients, opting to protect special interests,” Dr. Schaaf said.  “Physicians need to send the AMA a strong message that they will not tolerate AMA’s support of this horrible bill.”

Schaaf noted that the proposal before the Senate ignores several basic problems with our health system while enlarging an already broken Medicaid program and burdening all patients with increased health insurance costs and taxes.  Among other problems…

  • The high cost of defensive medicine due to frivolous lawsuits is not addressed.

  • Market reforms, such as allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines and the addition of transparency to the medical marketplace, would lower the cost of healthcare through increased competition but are left out of the bill.

  • The perverse incentives built into the Medicaid program are addressed for neither patients nor providers.

  • While the bill includes a huge expansion of the Medicaid program, it does nothing to fix the problem patients have seeing specialists, many of whom refuse to schedule adequate visit slots for Medicaid patients because of the insufficient payments for care.  Medicaid would continue to pay physicians less than their cost of providing care.  The Medicaid patients added to the program by the bill will further worsen the already severe access problem.

  • The Medicare Physician Payment formula is broken and has led to many physicians refusing to see Medicare patients.  The bill does not provide the needed fix.

  • Younger patients would be burdened with the cost of health insurance as a result of the prohibition against preexisting condition exclusions coupled with the mandate to purchase insurance.

  • Political payoffs have resulted in some states getting greater subsidies for Medicaid at the expense of other states such as Missouri under the bill.

  • Even though physician-owned hospitals have been shown to provide lower cost and more effective care to patients, physicians would be banned from future hospital ownership.  This political payoff to the hospital industry will protect them from the competition needed to force down costs and will deny patients the benefits of better and less expensive care.

  • The perverse incentive of cost-based reimbursement of some providers, including hospitals, is not addressed.

  • Patients are not guaranteed access to their own physicians, as under the bill, insurance companies would continue to be allowed to refuse panel membership to any physician willing to accept a company’s terms.  According to a recent poll, this simple reform is supported by over ninety percent of the public.

  • The bill contains more regulatory burdens on physicians and will make it harder for them to provide care to patients.  Many older physicians would retire early as as a result, frustrated with an already over-regulated medical practice.

  • The employer mandates in the bill would strain many businesses, thus putting many workers out of work.  This political payoff would enrich insurance companies.

  • Insurance companies would continue to enjoy exemption from antitrust law as a result of one senator’s demand, blatantly protecting this special interest group that supported him.

  • The costs of Medicaid expansion would eventually become an unfunded mandate, straining the budgets of states such as Missouri, which already has a severe budget problem.

  • Increased taxation of makers of medical devices would reduce innovation and increase costs for patients.

“While some patients would receive free or subsidized health care, they would do so at the expense of fellow citizens, all of whom would see increased health insurance costs as a result of this bill.  Congress has squandered an opportunity to make changes that would lower costs for everyone and instead, Congress plans to move us closer to socialized medicine,” Dr. Schaaf said.  “They are forcing this bill down the throats of the American public, which poll after poll show are in opposition.”

Dr. Schaaf urges fellow AMA member physicians to contact member services at (800) 262-3211, or by emailing, and drop membership until such time as AMA demands a meaningful bill before giving its support.  He also urges physicians to retain membership in their state organizations, such as the Missouri State Medical Association, which has objected to the legislation before Congress.

“Hopefully, if enough physicians act quickly, the AMA will realize the seriousness of this mistake and reverse it,” Schaaf noted.  “If AMA does so, I will encourage physicians to reconsider, as I will, this painful decision to leave the organization.”

Dr. Schaaf encourages physicians to widely distribute this press release, especially to fellow physicians.


The Stouffer Report:

Real Solutions to Health Care

The mainstream media loves to accuse opponents of so-called health care “reform” of obstructing progress and not having proposals of their own. The truth is there are dozens of plans to help improve cost and access to quality care — you just are not hearing about them.

As laws are currently written, you can only buy an insurance policy from a provider licensed in the state where you live. Over the years, proposals to enable you to buy a plan from another state have been offered and rejected. There are a few such plans out there right now, offered as alternatives to the proposals in the U.S. House and Senate.

Proponents of interstate insurance policies say such a law would increase choices and lower prices for the 17 million Americans who buy individual coverage. Opponents say buying insurance from another state would decrease good coverage and wind up costing more, because one state’s consumer protection laws would not cover another’s safeguards. While this could be viewed as more of a state’s rights issue, it is an alternative to what is seemingly being shoved down our throats from the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. on a much larger scale.

Another solution comes in the form of tort reform, which Missouri lawmakers passed in 2005. House Bill 393 was signed by the governor in March of that year. It was one of the best reform bills ever signed in our state’s history. The goal was to remove frivolous lawsuits from our courts. Most of those were malpractice suits that were clogging up our legal system, making it look more like the lottery than justice. Since then, the number of lawsuits has been declining and the judgments in these cases have been dropping to more sustainable levels. If we could get something like this passed on a national level, the amount of money you spend on health care would drop. However, it would be ideal if the states would put the interests of its people first, not the trial lawyers, and enact similar reforms.

The federal government seems to be obsessed with passing some sort of health care bill as quickly as it can. As I have mentioned before, there are roughly 4,000 pages in the House and Senate versions of “reform.” It would appear a majority of U.S. representatives and senators have not read every page contained in either of these bills. This was made obvious to me during the summer, when thousands of people went to town halls across the country and could quote directly from the bills, while the lawmakers were scrambling to get answers from assistants.

Somewhere among all of these different proposals, whether they are the ones you hear about or the ideas that are not on the front page, is a real solution to these challenges. I have little faith in the ability of the federal government to do the right thing. I do, however, have all the faith in the world in you — the American taxpayer.

Senator Stouffer serves the counties of Carroll, Chariton, Cooper, Howard, Lafayette, Macon, Ray, Saline, and a part of Clay.

Below is the most recent edition of Straight Talk With Sam Graves. In it he gives comment on the newest insult to freedom, HR 3296 “Nancycare.”What a surprise it’s as bad as conservatives have been warning it would be.

Same Bill, Same Problems

This past August, I held 23 town hall meetings across the district. I heard over and over again that my constituents did not want a government takeover of health care. That message was not delivered by slick television ads or special interest lobbyists. Instead, it was delivered by everyday people who had finally had enough. I heard the message loud and clear, but that was not the case for everyone.

Last week, Speaker Pelosi introduced her version of health care reform. The 1,990 page proposal is very similar to the plan that Americans overwhelmingly rejected in August. It costs just over $1 trillion dollars.

Who is going to pay for it? In short, we all are. The bill proposes billions in new taxes. Small businesses that file as individuals will be hit hard. It will also require all but the smallest of businesses to provide health insurance for their employees, regardless of their ability, or pay a penalty.

The bill will also require individuals to buy health insurance. Those who don’t will pay the federal government a penalty fee. In addition, there are new taxes on medical devices like wheelchairs and bandages. The bill would also cut nearly $500 billion from Medicare.

In short, this bill will increase your insurance premiums, cost us jobs with new taxes and mandates, and cut billions from our seniors’ Medicare benefits. That is not common sense reform. I will oppose this bill and work to pass common sense health insurance reform.


Sam Graves