background image

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Federal & Medical - the two should never have met

This is my latest letter to Senator Marco Rubio.  I know, why bother?  For some strange reason I just feel compelled to speak out from time to time.

First Marco's response to my contact asking him to consider repealing the ACA instead of replacing it with more lawless nonsense.

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:28 PM, Senator Marco Rubio wrote:
Dear Mr. Bessent,
Thank you for taking the time to express your thoughts regarding health care reform in America. Understanding your views helps me better represent Florida in the United States Senate, and I appreciate the opportunity to respond.
Our nation’s health care system is vast and complex, and decisions made by the federal government regarding the system affect all Americans. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, often called ObamaCare, was passed by Democrats in Congress and signed into law by President Obama in 2010. Instead of the wonderful results they promised, ObamaCare caused millions of people to lose their health insurance, premiums to skyrocket, and now many Americans are stuck with fewer choices and less access to care. 
Since ObamaCare’s launch, average monthly premiums have skyrocketed 105 percent nationwide and insurers continue to leave the market each year, resulting in some counties without a single insurer in the individual market for 2018. It’s clear that ObamaCare simply isn’t working. That’s why I am working to replace ObamaCare with a better system that puts patients first and does not rely on a taxpayer bailout of private insurance companies. In 2015, I detailed my ideas about what a better health care system should look like: provide families with refundable tax credits to help them purchase health insurance plans; empower consumers to choose plans based on their unique needs from anywhere in the country; and enable patients access the hospitals and doctors they want without government interference. We should create a patient-centered health care system that ensures those with pre-existing conditions can get affordable coverage.
In May 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act, which would repeal and replace ObamaCare and reform Medicaid to give States more flexibility. The Senate will work on its own bill, and I believe it must be better than the disaster that we have now with ObamaCare while still protecting the most vulnerable Americans. As the Senate deliberates this legislation, my priorities will be ensuring that Florida is treated fairly, that we incentivize innovation to improve health outcomes, and States are equipped with the necessary tools to encourage more healthy people to purchase a health insurance plan that fits their needs and budget. We must find commonsense solutions that better serve all Americans. 
It is an honor and a privilege to serve you as your United States Senator. I will keep your thoughts in mind as I consider these issues and continue working to ensure America remains a safe and prosperous nation.
Marco Rubio 
United States Senator 

Below is my response. I attempted to email it to him, but apparently character count (2000) is more important than sharing a full thought (5433 ).

The only bill that will be better is the one that completely removes the federal government from interfering with the medical profession what-so-ever.  The states or the local municipalities should decide what is required to "practice medicine."  Then we can have at least 50 and possibly thousands of "political labs" where the best and most cost effective solutions can be fostered, grown, and shared.  There should be absolutely NO DECISIONS made by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT regarding "the medical profession."   Technically doctors and hospitals operating within a State are not subject to the misuse of the Section 8 "Interstate commerce clause."  But, I get it - the federal government "has to do something"; who cares about Liberty?  I mean we are the land of the free so government regulation is necessary to keep us safe, right?  Without the most "intelligent" people in the nation making rules and keeping the rest of us safe in virtual and physical cages how could we possibly survive?  After all consensus science has only promoted the health and welfare of the people, correct? 
But freedom aside, what should really be done to "fix" the medical system?
1) REMOVE THE REASON LAWYERS LOVE MALPRACTICE: Doctors should be contracting privately with their clients without state coercion and the court system should dismiss lawsuits where gross negligence is not proven and eliminate punitive awards.  Really don't appreciate my money going to award people millions for mistakes or more appropriately the doctor's inability to actually be God.
2) DEREGULATE RECORDS: The farce of privacy that is known as HIPAA should be actually called hypocritical.  Oh, sure it sounds great on the surface, but it has more to do with providing government an excuse to access our digital records than it prevents unnecessary access.  Of course that lovely code comes from a federal department that shouldn't even exist.
3) REMOVE REQUIRED INSURANCE: Insurance is a complete sham.  Required insurance is slavery, especially insurance to cover the fact that one is alive.  Insurance should never have been about covering day to day medical expenses.  Auto insurance doesn't cover oil and tire changes, volunteer repaints, or engine rebuilds... and yet there is a very small percentage of American's who do not drive a car.  Who doesn't own a computer and why are they so cheap?  We have phone insurance that is a tiny amount per month covering $400+ dollar phones that are dropped regularly but what it doesn't cover is why it is so inexpensive...well that and it doesn't have an empire of force behind it requiring everyone to get it.
4) DEREGULATE THE ENTIRE MEDICAL SYSTEM: In reality the only thing that has ever forced medical expenses to rise is government interference.  The "we must do something" mentality has brought us to utter devastation of what was once the world's greatest example of a medical system.  Most people pay more in copay than they used to pay for the entire office visit while paying nearly $20K a year between their employer and direct premium for insurance.  This isn't reasonable and it is 100% due to government interference.   Government interference started the war on affordable medicine and ever since then it has never become more affordable.  Insurance destroyed the required relationship between the doctor and patient to decide the fee together and as a result the price fixing behind the scenes is damaging.  Deregulation is how you give people incentives.  Throwing money with strings at researchers isn't how you figure out better solutions; it is how you control outcomes.
5) GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS USE THE SAME SYSTEM: While we are near the subject I would only be impressed if congress voted to permanently eliminate their own unconstitutional "compensation" which includes all benefits that are unlike anything the average citizen would receive especially the nonsense of retirement.  The position of elected leadership in government was never to be considered a job.  It is supposed to be a temporary position with compensation for expenses incurred, not a living.  Your only sworn duty is to ensure the rights and safety of the people are enforced.  Everything else being legislated is unconstitutional and has nothing to do with the role of government.
News flash: if the current US government simply closed up shop and never re-opened the people and the land would continue on and I see no reason to believe it would not be much better off.  Please work on removing it from our daily lives - it was never intended to be this oppressive or this involved with individuals.  Government does not help and was never intended to. It was intended to raise a military from our existing militias when an imminent threat existed, provide LIMITED copyrights, maintain a Navy, regulate and borrow (oh and pay back) money , ensure people can communicate (post office), and open or restrict commerce between (not within) the states and between the US and foreign nations (but I'm being redundant).  The problem with the commerce clause as originally penned is regulating capitalism leads to corruption.  Capitalism should be left unchecked until the rights of an individual have been infringed upon and then defensive force should be brought only upon the infringing party and not upon a field as a whole.
I could go on, but I'm sure you aren't reading this anyway.
Marc Bessent

No comments: