Walker pushes Rationing to save Medicaid money at Federal Community Health Centers

Regulating and downsizing federal programs is the best way to get out the vote and to stir up the GOP based. As long as there's a Democrat in the White House, state restrictions are dead on arrival.

So I can only assume state republicans are hoping their voters won’t notice Scott Walker's attempt to ration health care. Yes, the party that whines about rationing now wants to ration health care. Rationing is used to argue against the Affordable Care Act.

Republican rationing, under the guise of “efficiency” and reducing the number of costly patients having access, may actually slip by the usually distracted conservative Wisconsin voter watching Fox News and listening to talk radio.

This is rationing, plain and simple. Conservative voters are being duped again by their own party. You know you're rationing when you cut health center reimbursements, putting them in jeopardy:  

WPR: Federal community health centers that provide care to under-served groups in the state would see a change in Medicaid reimbursement under the governor’s budget. The centers are currently fully reimbursed for the cost to provide patient services under Medicaid. However, Wisconsin Department of Health Services Spokeswoman Stephanie Smiley said … "the current system isn't an efficient or economic way to provide care…to achieve positive health care outcomes..." said Smiley, noting that full reimbursements would incentivize providers to see more patients.

Huh? Full reimbursements would result in more patients? Just as crazy, we don't want to see every patients that needs medical care?

Just guessing, but maybe reducing preventive care will result in more costly medical attention later? See, ObamaCare is bad:

Lisa Olson, the association's policy director (for) the Wisconsin Primary Health Care Association representing 17 community health centers, said the savings are artificial … "They don’t take into effect the additional cost of providing care in the last 15 years as health centers have added services in response to community need," said Olson.

Republicans are trying to ration health care, not the Democrats. Rep. Dianne Hesselbein wrote this in her latest press release:

On rural health, Walker has praised Wisconsin’s programs to audiences in Iowa, but in his budget he eliminates the Rural Physician Residency Assistance Program and deletes loan forgiveness programs for medics who agree to work in rural areas. He also cuts $25 million in Medicaid payments to most of the state’s 17 vital community health centers. 

Note: Republicans want to "block grant" Medicaid money so the federal strings (regulations) are cut forever, allowing states to make care almost impossible to get without drug tests, work requirements, reduced lifetime limits, and whatever hoop they can come up with next. 

State Republicans Blast mandate requiring oral chemo drugs, so insurers can save money. Blame the free market if people die.

Republican Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch wants the free market to decide if oral chemo therapy should be included in all Wisconsin insurance policies, the same kind of treatment she received through husband Rep. Joel Kleefisch's government provided health insurance plan.

And she's not alone. While conservatives have criticized government bureaucrats for supposedly getting between a doctor and their patient with rationed care, their beloved free market insurance companies are allowed to ration care to save money.

GOP Rationing Okay: At what is more than a glimpse into what Republican free market health insurance will look like, rationed care is rationalized as a good thing now, because it will save insurers money and get rid of those nasty government mandates. Small government = no mandates/lost lives. From WKOW's Greg Neuwmann:



This denial of coverage is a direct result of Republican opposition to "mandates." Yes, this is how far Republicans will go to prove their purity of purpose! This bizarre story first appeared in Nov. 2011, when Rebecca Kleefisch stated point blank that residents of Wisconsin should be treated differently than someone married to a state legislator.  She's "hoping" more insurance companies will cover the drug. Oh, and you'll love the insurance industry rep justifying the cost savings and threatening higher premiums if there's a mandate:



The elitist attitude shines through in the Kleefisch comments below:

Yesterdays poll results

Keefisch: "We obviously want to encourage free enterprise and free markets, but on the other hand, Oral chemotherapy is something that is up and coming in the medical world, and we're hoping, obviously that more insurance companies will cover it."

Kleefisch comes at the issue from a personal perspective. His wife, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, used oral and IV chemo to fight colon cancer in 2010. But he (Rep. Joel Kleefisch) has questions over the cost of an insurance mandate.

"It is my hope and prayer that anybody who would need this type of chemotherapy would be able to receive it, no doubt," said Kleefisch. "That does not eliminate the difficult question for who is going to pay for it." 

Rep. Joel Kleefisch is actually weighing out whether we should save lives or keep costs down. And these guys say Democrats want to ration care?

Florida Rationing Medicaid Services, deny mandated coverage to save money.

Well what do you know, Florida Republicans have decide to ration health care and renege on the Medicaid promise to provide coverage.

Funny thing, in justifying his reason for denying the expansion of Medicaid, Scott Walker warned us how the federal government will someday renege on its Medicaid obligations. Projection? 

It appears Florida state Republicans beat the federal government to the punch. They've decided to ration treatment. But aren't the Republicans the ones screaming about rationing and Medicaid funding wariness?

Miami Herald: Florida has been limiting Medicaid patients to six emergency room visits a year even though federal officials consider such a cap illegal. As a result, the federal government intends to penalize the state by withholding a portion of Medicaid funding.

“We hope the state will realign their Medicaid program with federal standards to avoid this penalty,” said Emma Sandoe, a spokeswoman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Rationing, pure and simple: The GOP has even rationalized their limits as "a cost saving measure." Rationing.

Limiting the number of ER visits is intended to be a cost-saving measure. Republican lawmakers in 2012 said it would encourage patients to rely on primary care doctors instead of hospital ERs.

Such limits on ER visits, the federal agency says, violate the Social Security Act by “arbitrarily” denying coverage of a mandatory benefit and would not be in patients’ best interest.

This is the kind of policy we'll see from Republicans once they convert to block grants for Medicaid dollars, with no strings attached, leaving the federal government powerless to help.

Health care rationing a good thing say Republicans...if it saves money & protects doctors and hospitals!

Warnings of health care rationing and death panels by the Republicans Party has turned out to be more of the same, "projection." Bureaucratic meddling only works if you're a Republican.

It’s actually something Republicans have had in the works for some time, and it's something they've rationalized as a good thing. Perhaps “rationalization” should be mentioned more often when describing conservative contradictions.

Anytime State Sen. Glenn Grothman is involved, with tag along former bad weather man Rep. Jim Ott, you know somebody’s going to get hurt or die.

Both want to ration a doctors advice, by not requiring physicians to fully explain a patients treatment options as declared by the state Supreme Court:

Post Crescent: Doctors would not be required to give patients as much information about alternative treatments available to them under a Republican-sponsored bill on a fast track … reaction to a 2012 Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that said a doctor’s “informed consent” duty includes telling a patient about medical tests and treatments that may be appropriate for a patient’s symptoms, even if the doctor doesn't believe the patient has the underlying condition or disease. Ott/Grothman said the 4-3 Supreme Court ruling was likely to increase medical costs and result in “defensive medicine.”

And who knows, may even save a life or two? The health care industry doesn't like it so...there’s nothing worse than “defensive medicine.” 

Patient’s aren't the focus of Ott and Grothman, oddly enough. These are our supposed representatives,right? So how horrible is the current standard, and why does it need to be changed so quickly? 

Their proposal would change the law from a “reasonable patient standard” to a “reasonable physician standard.” The law currently requires a doctor to inform the patient about the availability of all alternate, viable medical modes of treatment and the benefits and risks associated with those, with some exceptions. The current law doesn’t require doctors to overwhelm patients with details that may not be important, it simply requires they be given information they would want to know.

Democratic lawmakers oppose the measure, saying the current law protects patient rights. “The consumer being given knowledge is a good thing, particularly when you’re making decisions about your own body,” said Democratic state Rep. Dana Wachs.

And like everything done by Republicans, who often complain when Democrats are in power that not enough time was given for a full debate and public input, “Ott is moving quickly on the bill.” 

J.B. Van Hollen says Republican Legislature should make medical decisions, not doctors. U.S. Supreme Court Disagrees!!

Boy, the courts are in the news today. The following case is another instance where Wisconsin Republicans tried insert big government regulations between a patient and their doctor. Even the conservative activist U.S. Supreme Court didn't believe what they were hearing:

Imperial AG Van Hollen

jsonline: The U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider reinstating a Wisconsin law that banned hormone treatments or sex-change surgeries for transgender prison inmates. The justices rejected the state's appeal of a ruling that the 2006 Wisconsin law, by withholding treatments that prison doctors deem medically necessary, violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments. "Refusing to provide effective treatment for a serious medical condition serves no valid penological purpose and amounts to torture," the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled. "Just as the legislature cannot outlaw all effective cancer treatments for prison inmates, it cannot outlaw the only effective treatment for a serious condition" such as gender identity disorder.

Never letting the constitution, or even sound medical treatments get the way of ideology, here’s what Wisconsin AG J.B. Van Hollen put out as his “legal” argument:

The state's high court appeal said gender identity disorder is a "psychological condition" and the Legislature was within its authority to say treatment should be limited to "psychotherapy, antipsychotics and antidepressants." The Eighth Amendment "does not prohibit prison officials, prison medical personnel and, most certainly, a state legislature, from denying a small, controversial subset of the wide variety of treatment available for a particular diagnosis."

Get that; "the legislature was within its authority to say treatment should be limited." Isn't this one of the Republican arguments against the Affordable Care Act's IPAB is all about? “Unaccountable bureaucrats should never have the power to deny you the care you deserve.” Hypocrites!

But just as crazy, Republicans are okay with constitutional violations if it only effects “a small, controversial subset” of people. Of course the legislature would know than the doctors that say hormonal treatments are necessary. Is this just another example of big government health care rationing?

"There was no evidence controverting the testimony of numerous witnesses that, for some people" with severe gender identity disorder, "psychotherapy or psychotropic medication alone" is "simply not effective," lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union and the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund said, representing the inmates. Lawyers for the inmates said doctors in the Wisconsin prison system were the ones who diagnosed the inmates and prescribed the hormone treatments as medically necessary.

Government Health Care Rationing of Medicaid is Here.

As we get nearer to universal health care, the warnings of health care rationing by Republicans is now something they themselves are promoting. The Democratic standout is Hawaii, with the shortest proposed stays each year. Go figure. USA Today:

A growing number of states are sharply limiting hospital stays under Medicaid to as few as 10 days a year to control rising costs of the health insurance program for the poor and disabled. Advocates for the needy and hospital executives say the moves will restrict access to care, force hospitals to absorb more costs and lead to higher charges for privately insured patients. States defend the actions as a way to balance budgets hammered by the economic downturn and the end of billions of dollars in federal stimulus funds this summer that had helped prop up Medicaid, financed jointly by states and the federal government. Arizona, which last year stopped covering certain transplants for several months, plans to limit adult Medicaid recipients to 25 days of hospital coverage a year, starting as soon as the end of October. Hawaii plans to cut Medicaid coverage to 10 days a year in April, the fewest of any state.

In an ironically outrageous twist:

Private health insurers generally don't limit hospital coverage, according to America's Health Insurance Plans, a trade group.

All of this means we're about to see bigger increases in medical costs and insurance premium hikes, not because of health care reform, but because of rationing.

Hospitals won't discharge or refuse to admit patients who medically need to be there, said Peter Wertheim, spokesman for the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association. "Hospitals will get stuck with the bill," he said. 

State Proposes Medicaid Rationing, while taking advantage of "Obamacare" Benefits.

Gov. Walker and the other whiny Republican liars that fill our state Capitol, continually fear monger and warn that someday the government will ration health care, picking winners and losers.

So what are our Republican legislators thinking about doing; rationing government health care. Anyone else notice?

jsonline: To help address a half-billion dollar shortfall in the state's health programs, Gov. Scott Walker's administration is seeking to shift hundreds of thousands of state residents to lower-cost state plans or to private plans … state Health Services Secretary Dennis Smith said that the state would … look instead at efforts like shifting 230,000 state Medicaid recipients into a lower-cost plan with fewer benefits.

Government rationing of health care, by Republicans right? They were warning us about…themselves. 

Think Progress noted this important piece of hypocrisy:

As part of its reform package, Wisconsin submitted two waiver requests to the federal government that would allow the state to push some families with an offer of employer coverage off the rolls and require “young adults between the ages of 19 and 26 to join their parents’ insurance plans“:Of course, young adults are only be able to join their parents’ policies thanks to a provision in the Affordable Care Act, which the state is challenging in court and has undermined at every turn. Now, Wisconsin officials are seeking to take advantage of the law in order to soften the cuts to their Medicaid program.

If they look deeper into the measure — and move beyond their rhetoric about government takeover and one-size-fits-all — they may even discover that they can solve their “dwindling federal funding” problem by accepting health reform’s grants and the additional dollars that will come with Medicaid expansion.

Dirty little Secret: Republicans Rationing Health Care Now!!

With no Federal extension of Medicaid funding, thanks to tax cutting, deficit fear mongering Republicans, states have now got to ration care and coverage. Isn’t that what conservatives said would happen with the Democrats Affordable Care Act?

Republicans have forced nationwide rationing:

Bostonglobe: From New Jersey to California, state officials are bracing for the end to more than $90 billion in federal largesse designated for Medicaid. To hold down costs, states are limiting benefits for Medicaid recipients, reducing the scope of covered services.

That’s what I call Republican rationing. 

Rationalizing Rationing, the Paul Ryan Way.

Since Paul Ryan’s Dickensian plan for America is now the hot topic and possible future economic plan for the U.S., the discussion has turned to limiting Medicare payments to a set amount, with anything over that your problem. Don’t have the money? Too bad, it was good knowing you.

The states were actually first to try rationing…yes rationing. In the Bizarro World of Republican “projection,” their warnings about rationing…weren’t really warnings, just wishful thinking. The states have been so successful denying care, Congress couldn't resist getting in on the action.

Like voodoo economics, fiscal conservativism, death panels and enemy teachers, rationing is the next bill of goods we're expected to buy into. The section below is part of an opinion featured at Econbrowser, and it’s raw. Over time, many will think this all makes wonderful sense:   

(2) Changing the path requires denying some medical services for someone who would otherwise receive them. Many of the partisan advocates try to claim that their proposal can solve the problem by eliminating inefficiencies or fraud. I am not going to deny that there is some potential for improvement. But pretending that this is the sole issue we need to address is a disservice. The basic reality is that we have found some ways to prolong life and reduce suffering that are very, very expensive. What we need, in my opinion, is a social and moral framework for deciding which of these are worth doing and which are not.
And there are three ways to determine which medical services don't get provided.

• (a) The government can limit the procedures it will pay for and the people who are eligible to receive them.

• (b) The insurance company or other third party can limit the procedures they will pay for and the people who are eligible to receive them.

• (c) If (a) and (b) both say no and you don't have the money yourself to pay for it, then you do not receive the treatment.

Each of those options is morally troubling to many of us. But reality forces us to choose some mix of the three. Pretending that there are no tough choices just digs us deeper into a debt that can't be repaid. 

The radical aspect of Ryan's plan is, instead of specifying which procedures the government will pay for, the government limits the dollar amount that it will contribute, beyond which, it's left to (b) and (c). 

Impossible, you say, to imagine any politician saying such a thing? Sorry, it’s already happened.  

Last February, 2010, Ezra Klein interviewed Rep. Paul Ryan and pressed him about rationing, and how his Road Map would lead to that eventually. He admitted this shocking reality:

Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein calls it rationing, since he believes seniors would have to buy less comprehensive policies and cut back on care. Ryan, in an interview with Klein, argues that the programs are growing themselves into extinction, and his plan at least gives seniors the choice to choose the care they receive. Said Ryan: "Rationing happens today! The question is who will do it? The government? Or you, your doctor and your family?"

The Health Care Game of Chicken in Arizona. Guess who loses?

Keith Olbermann talks to State Sen. David Schapira about Gov. Jan Brewer's determination to save money over human life. Republican government rationing appears to be okay if it can save taxpayer money. But then, that shouldn't really be a surprise to us, since tax cuts justify everything.

Ruthless Paul Ryan wants Americans to "Control" and Ration Health Care for their loved ones, a Cruel Twist on Freedom.

Last February, 2010, Ezra Klein interviewed Rep. Paul Ryan and pressed him about rationing, and how his Road Map would lead to that eventually. He admitted this shocking reality:

Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein calls it rationing, since he believes seniors would have to buy less comprehensive policies and cut back on care. Ryan, in an interview with Klein, argues that the programs are growing themselves into extinction, and his plan at least gives seniors the choice to choose the care they receive. Said Ryan: "Rationing happens today! The question is who will do it? The government? Or you, your doctor and your family?"

Below, Ryan hasn't changed his tune, but he has re-framed his horrific plan for rationing in a way tea party dunderheads could understand. Forcing families into making shocking life and death decisions and traumatizing loved ones at their most vulnerable moment, by withholding care they can't afford, Ryan puts it this freedom fighting way:

"I want to be in control of my, and my families health care. I want individuals to be in control of their health care, AND THEIR DESTINY."

Remember when Government Health Care Rationing was a Bad Idea? Guess that only applied to Obama’s Reform.

Conservatives are quick to RATION health care if it saves them money, like in Arizona. In this new age of “save yourself first,” the call for rationing has expanded. I can’t deny parts of the request make sense, but still, something is wrong with our society if these are the only choices.

In this case, the Wisconsin Medical Society point blank came right out and said it.

WSJ: As the state prepares to plug a $1.2 billion Medicaid hole, it should look beyond cutting enrollment, payments and entire benefit programs to another option: rationing care, as Oregon does.

That’s what the Wisconsin Medical Society, the state’s doctor association, is proposing. Oregon ranks services and refuses to cover a fourth of them because of budget constraints.

Dr. Tim Bartholow, a senior vice president of the medical society; “We want as many people as possible to have access to some care, rather than let some have terrific access and other people have none,”

It makes sense, yet should leave anyone with any sense of humanity, icy cold.

The proposal, approved by the medical society board after the November election of Republican Gov. Scott Walker, will be offered to the Walker administration as an alternative to payment cuts for doctors, Bartholow said. It could also prevent or reduce the need for other reductions, he said, such as curbing eligibility and slashing programs such as dental care and prescription drugs.

But even this serious suggestion to keep people from losing all care is met with Republican indifference. In fact, their silence suggests they have other, more draconian solutions.

Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie didn’t respond to the medical society proposal when asked about it. He said Walker “continues to evaluate a number of options to balance the budget without raising taxes.”

Most states face Medicaid deficits even after 39 states cut provider payments and 20 states reduced benefits last year, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Arizona recently eliminated coverage for some organ transplants, gaining national attention for cutting care for conditions that are often fatal. 

Wanna make a bet not as many health care “freeloaders” will be covered in a couple of years?

Arizona Republicans Warn Against Health Care Reform Rationing, While Rationing Health Care Statewide!!!

What really are the Republican spending priorities? Save a few lives or fix a stadium roof? The party of opposites are already rationing health care in Arizona through new governmnet regulations, while on the national stage, warn against "possible" Democratic socialist rationing.

Keith Olbermann explains how the GOP is having it both ways, along with Chris Hayes:

Related articles

• Arizona Begins Rationing Care For Medicaid Patients By Denying Coverage For Transplants (insidesurgery.com)
• Arizona rations organ transplant services (medcitynews.com)
• Medicare chief says he opposes rationing care (sfgate.com)
• A Death Panel Convenes... (slog.thestranger.com)

Ron Johnson Advocates Health Care Rationing by Cutting Government funded Stem Cell Research.

So who are the first politicians to commit health care rationing atrocities? Republicans and candidate Ron Johnson.

U.S. Senate candidate Ron Johnson says his opposition to federal funding for research on embryonic stem cells is mainly dictated by economics. Johnson says the federal government needs to cut $1.5 trillion from its budget so it makes sense to do so by eliminating unpopular programs.

Instead of basing funding on research, Johnson is making health care decisions based on popularity via big government.

Rep. Paul Ryan on His Medicare Rationing Plan: "Rationing happens today! The question is who will do it?"

The star of the Republican Party, Rep. Paul Ryan, has been getting a tremendous amount of press lately (guilty as charged) for his Road Map for America's Future. The road kill you see up ahead are senior citicizens and retirees. Check out this analysis from the Minneapolis StarTribune.com;

Ryan wants to privatize both Medicare, the government-run health care program for seniors, and Medicaid, the joint state/federal health care program for the poor and elderly (many depend on Medicaid to pay for nursing home care). He also wants to put caps on how much the government spends on them. For example, seniors currently enrolled in Medicare would get vouchers to buy their own private health insurance plan. The money set aside for vouchers would not grow in lock-step with Medicare's projected costs.

Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein calls it rationing, since he believes seniors would have to buy less comprehensive policies and cut back on care. Ryan, in an interview with Klein, argues that the programs are growing themselves into extinction, and his plan at least gives seniors the choice to choose the care they receive. Said Ryan: "Rationing happens today! The question is who will do it? The government? Or you, your doctor and your family?"

Ryan, so far, is one of the few politicians who's willing to point this out. His prescriptions for the Big Three entitlements are radical and unpalatable. But at least, he's offering up specific solutions. It's a brutal yet admirable kind of honesty, one that's in short supply around the nation's capital.

Ryan gets kudos for being brutally honest? Radical and unpalatable is good? Here's hoping all of this is in short supply in the nations capital. But there's more, where Ryan reduces health care to a mere product . From Ezra Klein's interview:

Klein: The Lasik thing is interesting because it gets to the question of whether health care is a market. When I think of getting Lasik, or buying a television, I can walk out of the store. That’s what gives me as a consumer my power in the market. But if I have chest pains and my doctor prescribes a bypass, how do I walk out of the store?

Ryan: In Milwaukee, the price of bypass ranges from $47,000 to $100,000. Nobody knows where to go for quality, or the prices. So wouldn’t it be good for the prices and quality metrics to be publicized? And let people make a decision. There’ll always be some level of co-pay or deductible or co-insurance that’s going to push people towards the best value.

Then, when you have those chest pains and you’re being rushed in the ambulance, you’ll be rushed to a hospital that’s all along been competing for business and has been improved by that process. You’ll get better health care than you otherwise would. That’s how you improve the system.

Just a thought: If a hospital has to reduce prices to compete, will that reduce the amount of care and quality of treatment? It brings to mind this one free market principle, an old latin warning; "Buyer Beware." That's Ryan's health care gamble for Americans.

GOP Opposition to Universal Health Coverage Loses Another Dumb Argument.

Uh oh! Republicans have suddenly realized that they have been paying a “hidden tax,” and footing the bill for “lazy health care freeloaders,” for years without even knowing it. That’s right, “HIDDEN TAXES.”

Conservatives have argued for years that socialized medicine would force them to pay for someone else’s health care insurance. It is a patently silly idea, but that’s their story, and now I’m wondering if they’re sticking to it.

AP-The average family with health insurance shells out an extra $1,000 a year in premiums to pay for health care for the uninsured, a new report finds. And the average individual with private coverage pays an extra $370 a year because of the cost-shifting, which happens when someone without medical insurance gets care at an emergency room or elsewhere and then doesn't pay.

Families USA calls it a "hidden tax." Families USA contracted with the independent actuarial consulting firm Milliman Inc. to analyze federal data to produce the findings.

"As more people join the ranks of the uninsured, the hidden health tax is growing," said Ron Pollack, Families USA executive director. "That tax hits America's businesses and insured families hard in the pocketbook, and they therefore have a clear financial stake in expanding health care coverage."

The report found that, in 2008, uninsured people received $116 billion in health care. ... (Part of) that sum made its way into premiums charged by private insurance companies to businesses and individuals, the report said. Ronald A. Williams, chairman and chief executive of Aetna Inc. said, “You're paying for your own care as well as for the care of some of the uninsured in the community."

Hello…do you get it now?

Health Care Rationing coming Home to the Elderly, Literally

As Republicans talk up America as having the best health care in the world, all the while bashing the other industrialized countries for their universal coverage and supposed government rationing, they seemed to have missed of our own dramatic shift in rationing care. Don't get me wrong, the Democrats have done little to bring the problem out of the shadows, so they're partly to blame as well. NY Times:

Battered by the recession and the deepest and most widespread budget deficits in several decades, a large majority of states are slicing into their social safety nets — often crippling preventive efforts that officials say would save money over time. President Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package is helping to alleviate some of the pain … But the money will offset only 40 percent of the losses in state revenues, and programs for vulnerable groups have been cut in at least 34 states, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a private research group in Washington.

Perhaps nowhere have the cuts been more disruptive than in Arizona, where more than 1,000 frail elderly people are struggling without home-care aides to help with bathing, housekeeping and trips to the doctor. Officials acknowledge that some are apt to become sicker or fall, ending up in nursing homes at a far higher cost. Mary Lynn Kasunic, president of the Area Agency on Aging in Phoenix, described the potential consequences. “If you don’t give people a bath a couple times a week, change the linens and make sure they get their medicines, their health will decline much faster,” she said. “They end up in the emergency room in a crisis, and then in a nursing home.” Ohio and other states face large cutbacks in child welfare investigations, which may mean more injured children and more taken into foster care. Despite tax increases, California has ended dental coverage for adults on Medicaid, all but guaranteeing future medical problems.

“There’s no question that we’re getting short-term savings that will result in greater long-term human and financial costs,” said Linda Blessing, interim chief of the Arizona Department of Economic Security.

Some toddlers with debilities like autism and Down syndrome are not getting therapies that can bring lifelong benefits. Winona Conn, 75, who uses a wheelchair because of a paralyzed leg, has been on the waiting list for home aid for a year. In Florida, recent modest cuts in home aid came on top of a growing backlog, while the number of people in need keeps climbing. The Illinois governor’s budget proposal wouldscale back home visits to ill-equipped first-time mothers.

Rationing health care in America is fact. The conservative fear mongering threat of government heath rationing under universal coverage rings empty now, with the private sector dumping the unhealthy into the state systems which are now being forced to ration care.

Nevada, the Health Care Hell Hole. They Love Gambling With Your Life.

Just a few posts down from this, you can see a similar report from NOW on PBS. This is a great piece of additional information from CBS's 60 Minutes. The idea that a hospital in Las Vegas set up collection boxes in convenient stores to help pay for care should make Nevada lawmakers proud.

CBS: Recently thousands of letters went out across Las Vegas telling cancer patients that the only public hospital in the state was closing its outpatient clinic for chemotherapy. Obviously, our gaming and tourism is tanking. The construction industry has been decimated. And all of those things cause big, gaping holes in the state budget. The hardest-hit area for us was the Medicaid budget," Kathy Silver, the hospital's CEO, explained.

Silver had signed that letter patients received. The $21 million was cut by the legislature when tax revenues went bust. Nevada is number one in foreclosures; unemployment is over 10 percent, double what it was last year and climbing. "When the hospital first informed you that the outpatient oncology clinic was closing, what did you think?" Pelley asked Dr. Nick Spiritos, who treats ovarian and uterine cancers.

"How can you do this to cancer patients? They're dying. If we don't provide them care, their outcome is guaranteed. They're going to die," he replied.

"If you're rich enough you're obviously fine. So who is falling through the cracks here?" Pelley asked.

"The patients who don't qualify for a social services type of program," Silver said.

"What we're talking about here are people who are making $30,000, $40,000, $50,000 a year and have lost their jobs and therefore lost their insurance?" Pelley asked.

"That’s correct," Silver replied.

"The middle class," Pelley remarked.

"That's correct," Silver said.

They've put collection boxes out at convenient stores around town. (Best Health Care in the world?)

Yolanda Coleman remains untreated. After 60 Minutes' visit, a medical supply company took away her hospital-style bed and her wheelchair. "You never know what God has for you down the road," she told Pelley. "But, I know he has more for me than just to leave my children because I can't have medical insurance." Yolanda Coleman had her insurance reinstated after 60 Minutes called the insurance company to ask why she had been dropped.

The Nevada state legislature is now considering a proposal to cut millions of dollars more from the budget of University Medical Center. (It's just part of the Republican plan to cut costly entitlements and rely only on market forces. How does it sound so far?)

We Already Have Health Care Rationing! A Government Backed Plan is Needed Now.

NOW on PBS is one of the most important consumer shows on television. Week after week I'm emotionally devastated by their riveting investigative reports, like this one about the private sectors rationing of health care . Republicans are quick to remind us of a government system of rationing if a single payer health care plan is adopted, but that ignores the current private system of rationing that has gone unexposed, until now.

If you watch anything on this blog, this should be it. If you're unmoved after watching this edited for length story of rationing, than god help you. NOW descibes it this way: NOW travels to Nevada, where a huge budget deficit, spiking unemployment, and cuts in Medicaid and other public services are forcing people to gamble with their own lives. Recently, the only public hospital in Las Vegas had to shut its doors to cancer patients and pregnant women. Should the government be helping out?



I am also including this health care analysis of our current system and responses to arguments against changing it by Mary Shaw, from the Online Journal. I am impressed by her logic and concise answers.

Whenever I advocate for universal single-payer health care for all Americans, the right-wingers flood my inbox with all the predictable myths.

First, they tell me that health care is not a right. They say it’s each citizen’s responsibility to provide it for his or her family. I guess this myth gives them another excuse to look down on the poor who cannot afford the luxury of medical insurance. It makes them feel superior.

In response to that, I point out that health care is indeed a basic human right, enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), to which the United States is a signatory. Article 25(1) of the UDHR states: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

But human rights standards don’t tend to sway these folks.

Then they cry “socialism,” as if that’s a bad thing. They fail to see that national single-payer health care managed by the government would not be much different from our current system of socialized libraries, socialized fire departments, and socialized police departments. These services are paid for with our tax dollars, and they’re readily available to us when we need them. It’s all for the greater good.

Then sometimes they wave the flag and tell me that we must not change our health care system because, in their opinion, the U.S. offers the very best health care available. Why mess with a good thing? In fact, the United States ranks 37th in the World Health Organization’s rankings of the world’s health systems (below Malta, Iceland, Saudi Arabia, and numerous other countries that might surprise you).

Furthermore, a recent report from the Business Roundtable suggests that “the costs and performance of the U.S. health care system have put America’s companies and workers at a significant competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace.”

In a nutshell, Americans spend a lot more on health care than other countries, but we aren’t as healthy. That seems to confirm the World Health Organization’s assessment of our less-than-stellar level of care, with the added issue of how we’re paying so much more to get so much less. Corporate profits over the health of the people. God bless America.

And, on a final note, most of these right-wing types describe themselves as “Christian.” Well, wasn’t Jesus Christ all about healing the sick? And, as the bible describes his ministry, I don’t think Jesus ever charged a penny for his healing services. I have yet to see a valid, logical response to this last point.

And I don’t expect to.

Mary Shaw is a Philadelphia-based writer and activist, with a focus on politics, human rights, and social justice. She is a former Philadelphia Area Coordinator for the Nobel-Prize-winning human rights group Amnesty International,