Pass [on] the Joint
September 10, 2009 - The President must think we are stoned, stupid, or forgot WHO's not in charge
First off, hello again! It's been some time, but I am alive and well (insert Kennedy quip here). My hiatus from Heeby Jeebie reflects my diversity of activity and responsibilities in my small world, both at work and at home. It's been a fun Summer break to vacation and see family, do projects, and follow the issues. It looks like a busy Fall too, but I hope to post as time allows.
I chose the President's Address on Healthcare, last night in a Joint session of Congress, to come at you again. Of course, the message was a repackaged version of what we left off with in early August. Fantastic oratory, fanatic progressivism. And while most have focused on H.R. 3200 for the better part of the last 5 weeks, today I propose to ponder 'just where is the policy described by the President coming from?' in an effort to understand while nothing has altered his path - despite historic opposition from the public. OK, OK settle down with the 'He got it from Satin' or 'from Marx' chatter!
Several weeks ago on Facebook, I wrote that it is clear to me that the current health care reform being pushed by Obama is based on the World Health Organization's "World Health Report 2000: Health Systems, Improving Performance". The WHO is a UN-based organization, with a mission to promote policy that spans across all nations, rich and poor [Strike 1]. Early on, my Google search revealed many of the statistics spewed by the President and his club were derived from the WHO report, such as "the U.S. ranks 37th in the world in performance". Of course, the devil is in the details. So, I next ask, 'what are the measures for such ranking?' And in scanning the report, I found some interesting answers.
First, the 2000 report discusses health systems in particular, and takes the view: "...while improving health is clearly the main objective of a health system, it is not the only one. The objective of good health itself is really twofold: the best attainable average level – goodness – and the smallest feasible differences among individuals and groups – fairness. Goodness means a health system responding well to what people expect of it;fairness means it responds equally well to everyone, without discrimination."
So, right off the bat, WHO calls out that a country's ranking of success is based on the average of goodness and fairness to all. ALERT: 'Fairness' is code-speak for 'Socialism' [Strike 2]. These goodness and fairness scores are rolled into an overall 'achievment score'. At once, U.S. would necessarily have an up-hill climb in setting such standards due to it's diversity in economic classes, cultural and ethnic backgrounds, regional differences, and so on. In other words, because we are a melting pot of such magnitude and breadth, we are bound to have wide differences and lower averages than certain other homogeneous societies.
Furthermore, the WHO Report, whereby the US is 37th, represents a ranking based essentially on the 'achievement score' divided by 'expense'. From a pure achievement standpoint, America - despite its diversity, ranked 15th - so our system expense brings us further down.
Our 'expense' requires some context: We are also the premier innovators of health care (and bogus litigation) in the world. And as the innovators, we are often expected to supply the rest of the world's nations innovative therapies 'at or below cost' for both economic and policy-based reasons - while our nation's people bear the brunt. It's a Catch-22 for us: technological leadership in medicine carries with it ethical responsibility, but innovators still need to make profit, so they make it in a free-market systems that allow profit - our market. As such, the free market bears higher costs for innovation. Destroy the profit, destroy the innovation - and the whole world loses out [Strike Three].
Amazingly, digging into the report, 50% of the weighting of 'achievement' in a health system [where we rank 15th] is based on the ‘fairness’ principal – how equal the care is across the population. This is reflected in the Health Distribution score and Distribution of Financial Burden scoring given by WHO. In other words, more disparity across the population is seen as a negative. Equality is rewarded. Sounding a little socialist?
For the majority of Americans happy with their health insurance coverage, 'fairness' doesn't usually come to mind when we're ill. We want access - this is, responsiveness - when we are sick. Interestingly, only 12.5% of the 'achievement score' from WHO relates to "Overall level of health system responsiveness (a combination of patient satisfaction and how well the system acts)" Such responsiveness includes two major components. These are (a) respect for persons (including dignity, confidentiality and autonomy of individuals and families to decide about their own health); and (b) client orientation (including prompt attention, access to social support networks during care, quality of basic amenities and choice of provider). What you won't hear in an Obama 'crisis' speeches is that the United States ranked 1st in this category, far and above every other nation. Because of the low weighting in the WHO achievement rank, this isn’t valued as much. But ask an individual ill with cancer, or in need of cronic care, and I'd bet it is all they care about.
In summary, America's 'crisis', in the Progressive's mind, relates to overall 'fairness', not responsiveness or so much 'goodness'. Our cost structure is a product of us leading the world in innovation, which in turn is a result of our system being one that actually supports the profit necessary to drive further innovation and supply other socialized systems the cutting edge medicines at cost.
And this is just scratching the surface of the report. In the report, beginning on page 58, rationing is discussed as a means by which to make systems ‘fair’. The recommended method of rationing is one in which it is explicitly “following priorities which were set according to some predetermined criteria, as discussed above. This approach, first introduced in the mid-1980s, has now been partially implemented in the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and Oregon (USA)”. Explicit rationing implies that certain outcomes, regardless of cost or frequency, will be rationed. This is where ‘Government Bureaucrats’ deciding your fate gains legitimacy.
Graphically, explicit rationing is depicted in the WHO report Figure 3.3. The 'preferred' system, as called out by WHO, is one in which a governing body decides which treatments, regardless of cost, will be rationed. This structure is depicted in the lower right.
'Outcomes', 'necessity', or 'improvement to health' are metrics the Obama camp uses. Under bureaucratic control, such rationing policy inevitably drifts towards age and disease-based decisions. 'Quality of life' treatments may seem less critical to the administrators trying to make budget - hence Obama's line 'take a pain pill' over getting a knee replacement.
Interestingly, the report goes on to state (p. 61): "Priority setting is generally considered a public sector exercise, particularly concerning the proper use of public or publicly mandated expenditure. It does not matter for this purpose whether the delivery of services is public or private, nor how providers are paid. What matters is that by contracting with private providers or reimbursing them through public insurance, the government can assure that its priorities are respected even where it does not provide the services...some priorities can nonetheless be enforced through regulation, as for example by requiring all private insurance policies to include a package of essential services or by limiting the degree to which private providers or insurers can select patients or clients on the basis of risk." In other words, eventually, he who holds the gold makes the rules - in this case, the government will control the market.
Amazingly, the WHO report does call out the risk in such a system (p 62): "...but hierarchical bureaucracies also have some serious shortcomings when it comes to the provision of health services. These shortcomings have become more apparent in recent years. Bureaucracies are vulnerable to capture by the vested interests of the bureaucrats and providers who work in them. They are often not as effective in downsizing or reorienting priorities as they are in expanding capacity and adding services. And they are often associated with many of the same shortcomings as private markets in terms of abuse of monopoly power (such as the collection of rents in the form of informal charges) and information asymmetry. Over time, many of the hierarchical service delivery systems have become excessively rigid, with inefficient processes producing low-quality care that is unresponsive to the needs and expectations of the populations and individuals that they serve." Of course, by this time, President Obama will be doing speaking engagements at $100K a pop to support his Foundation.
To wrap up, I'll comment that another area the President 'lied' to America tonight is in regards to illegal immigrants being prevented from getting benefits under a new system. As many have reported, H.R. 3200 may say illegal immigrants are not permitted benefits, but truth is there is no mechanism for enforcement or verification (through provisions of the SAVE [Secure America with Verification and Enforcement] Act). Believers of the WHO policy would never shut out the illegals, as it goes directly against the "fairness" principals outlined above. Hence, the convenient loophole in the legistlation. Obama and his ilk know this. Should we fail to demand a reform bill containing such verification, 'fairness' WILL be used as a means to secure amnesty for the illegals in the coming months.
As the debate on Health Care rages on, I'll conclude by saying that most middle class Americans work hard to elevate themselves within the middle class – through dedication towards achieving higher education, working well beyond 40 hours per week, and sacrificing personal rewards to give their children the best possible environment to excel. Modest gains come through years, or generations of personal sacrifice and perseverance. Quality health care coverage is but one of those gains sought and rewards earned, in my opinion. State-restricted or Federal-monopolized markets are not, or will not, helping to drive competition and access for a broader population. The idea that America as a whole must abandon principals of individual responsibility in order to care for those less advantaged through a public, profit-less system (whether it be in Health Care or social welfare) never really means the upper class will be taken down a full notch as a result; the wealthy elite will still be able to seek the health care they need in a free market (or black market) somewhere. Rather, it is those who have made incremental gains in their lives who are being asked to herd themselves into a rationed system with those who suffer misfortune, haven’t tried as hard, or are still working their way up. We are being asked by the elitists in our government to sacrifice for the greater good, while they give up little, or nothing, by way of their ability to receive the best care. It is clear, our hypocritical Congress, President, and their wealthy supporters will not stand in the same line as the rest of us. Instead, the broad middle class is, once again, the sacrificial lamb in this mandate. And it’s all in the name of ‘Fairness’ – or, at least 50% of it is.
July 24, 2009: New in Life & Liberty
A Commoner's Proposal - Health-Care Reform, Part 2
July 24, 2009
Yesterday, Part 1 of my Health-care Reform discussion focused on tearing down the Obamacare plan - one that seeks to place government in control of health-care options through creation of massive bureaucracy, taxation, and ultimately - deficits. Following the President’s primetime address, many pundits and legislators came back with similar analysis and alternate policy suggestions. I thank you all for you comments on my writing.
Today, I’d like to offer some thoughts on reforming health-care. Certainly, several of my thoughts are echoed by those in government; and likewise, I agree on some ideas proposed by leaders in the area...MORE
July 23, 2009: New in Life & Liberty
The Empty Head (of State) - Health-care Reform Pt. 1
July 23, 2009
President Obama’s primetime healthcare address last night offered nothing more than we’ve come to expect: overplaying the crisis he was dealt to further his tyrannical policies, overstating his accomplishments, dodging simple answers to questions, and utilizing confusing ‘code speak’ that left most Americans, I imagine, unable to comprehend if what they were hearing was good or bad. Hint: It was bad... MORE
Gr8 Times!
July 15, 2009 - Blah, Blah, Blah...Climate Change...Blah, Blah... Stimulus Plans...Blah Blah...Wait, was Obama checking her out?
Ah, summertime. What shall we do for vacation in this bad economy? A trip to Disney World? No way, have you seen those ticket prices? How about camping? Too late - booked solid, everyone is camping this year. OK, I guess its just a 'staycation' then? Hell no, I'm the President of the United States! Let's go visit Russia and Italy 'on business', and the whole fam can come along! Besides, I need to create an international diversion to get peoples minds off that messy Cap and Trade vote in the House.
And so, last week brought our Prez to Russia and Italy, family in tow. Once again preaching his 'One World' agenda, Obama's speech in Russia sought to erase the legacy of Ronald Reagan, and stressed the 'interdependence' of nations as a means to which he agreed to lower America's status as a military super-power.
Then it was off to Italy to attend the Group of Eight summit. Proving that America loves the metric system, Obama put his mouth before the law again and agreed to limit a rise in world temperatures by 2 degrees Celsius (that's 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) by controlling greenhouse gases. Sounds like another "create or save" promise, as the measurement is likely subjective, and the target soft. Never fear, one thing sure not to rise in the next 30 years is America's GDP under Cap and Tax!
The G8 seems like a lot of fun, unless your name is Dmitri Medvedev. He got sucked into a photo-op with host Silvio Berlusconi and French President Nick Sarkozy.
"[Sniff-Sniff]...did something die?"
"No, it's just the French guy."
OK, so then we had this picture show up from the G8, because everyone knew there needed to be a distraction least we actually start asking why we needed to pay for the Obamas' summer vacation.
The picture is real. Here is the video link. You be the judge as to whether it is 'clear' or not.
Careful, Barry, MO might think those new World Leader friends of yours are a bad influence. She's already ticked off that Berlusconi stuck her with a young, former topless model as a female host while you were working hard- made her look like the nanny in photo ops. If you hang with Sarkozy and Berlusconi any longer, we might see something like this:
And then you'll be in serious trouble - Like George Jefferson trouble...
MO: "I saw those pictures, what do you have to say for yourself?"
BO: "Honestly Weezie, I was just lookin' at her shoes! Tell her, Nick!"
NS: "Wee Wee, Weezie!"
MO: "I don't buy it. I'm takin' YOU to the cleaners!"
BO: "Oh, woman, I'm on vacation, I ain't goin' to work today! - Ha, ha-ha-ha, ha, ha!!"
MO: "Keep laughin', and instead of movin' on up, you'll be movin' on out!"
BO: "Oh, Weezie, stop talkin' like a crazy woman again! PLEASE! I'll do anything!"
MO: "[Pauses]...Look me in the face and tell me you love me."
BO: "I...I...I can't do it! I Love You, but I can't look at that grill of yours, and you know it!"
MO: "Out! Out!"
BO: "Oh, Weezie!!!...That's it. Come on Nick, let's roll down to the airport. I got some business to take care of."
NS: "Hoh, Hoh, Hoh! Wee Wee Ba-ree! I think some 'slutty flight attendants' are coming in on the Air France from New York. I shall be your wing-man and you my leader de la resistance"
BO: "Yeah, whatever Frenchy. Come on."
Next Story is Continued Below
Support Heeby Jeebie!
Use the link below for your next Amazon purchase. It costs you nothing and earns us a small commision!
Capped and Traded
June 26, 2009 - Your freedom will be Capped, and your wealth will be Traded
As the world shows lengthy tributes to a has-been pop icon's passing, Congress prepares to further enslave America under an oppressive new energy tax disguised as climate reform. Over 30,000 years ago, Neanderthals tamed fire, providing warmth and the ability to cook food. Modern man later employed it to harness the resources of the earth to refine metals and minerals into tools and weaponry. Eventually it was applied to take the burden of labor off men and animals alike in the form of engines, and the industrial revolution was born. Today, the Congress of the United States of America will attempt to regulate a fundamental freedom of humanity - the ability to harness fire as a tool for our comfort, health, betterment, and transportation. Progress? Even a caveman can answer that one.
June 25, 2009: New in Life & Liberty
A Letter to My Congressman
June 25, 2009
Too often, our duties as a spouse, parent, provider, or homeowner preclude us from understanding or engaging in debate over the policy decisions within local, state or national government. Indeed, such policies have tremendous impact on our lives - both now, and for the foreseeable future. Presently, the situations within all levels of government seem most precarious. With unemployment nearing 10% nationally, swelling deficits across the board, and a 'blood in the water' mentality amongst big government proponents, it would seem that everyone should - if they cherish the United States as the land of opportunity and freedom - take the time to 'weigh in'. Yet, as I've learned through talking with my family, friends, and neighbors, many do not 'have the time'...MORE
