Remember those good old days before ObamaCare?

Reliable catastrophic health care plans: Remember when a lot of people, yours truly included, bought plans to protect us from major expenses, not routine trips to the doctor? 

So where are the articles complaining about Medicare and Obamacare insurance coverage denials?

So where are the articles complaining about Medicare and Obamacare insurance coverage denials?: Ever since the UnitedHealthCare CEO was killed, we see a lot of articles railing against denials by private health insurance companies. We even see some degenerate people claiming that health insurance executives deserve to get killed.

What we don’t see are articles talking about how many claims Medicare turns down because most of the media are advocates for government-run health care for all. Facts don’t matter to the media when they are pushing an agenda.

Study: Obamacare will boost premiums by $4,000 per family

Here's a dirty little secret that Obama regime and its medial allies don't want you to know about.

Republican Party of Pennsylvania Chairman Rob Gleason issued the following reaction to a recent report that determined that the Democrats' most recent proposal for government-run, taxpayer-funded health care will raise insurance premiums for American families an additional $4,000 a year:

"The government-run, taxpayer-funded health care plan that President Obama and Democrats are proposing will drastically increase the cost of health care, while decreasing the level of care Americans are currently accustomed to," Gleason said. "I don't know anyone is interested in paying more money in exchange for a lower quality service, but that is exactly what this bill accomplishes. Additionally, I find it appalling that the President and the Democrats are pushing a bill that is a direct assault on hardworking families by increasing their insurance premiums by a staggering $4,000 a year."

The group America's Health Insurance Plans released a study conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers that estimates that the Democrat U.S. Senate health care bill will add $1,700 annually to the cost of family insurance coverage by 2013. They predicted that by the year 2019, prices could rise to $4,000 a year in costs for families and individual premiums could rise by $1,500. ("White House Tries to Strike Down Insurance Industry Criticism Ahead of Key Vote," Fox News, 10/12/09)

Census Bureau Releases Comprehensive Health Insurance Coverage Estimates by County

The U.S. Census Bureau has released county-by-county numbers on Americans who have health insurance.

To review your county's figures, follow the link below:

Census Bureau Releases Comprehensive Health Insurance Coverage Estimates by County

Executive Compensation at PA's Largest Blues' Plans

Highlights on CEO salaries/perks of the Blue Cross giants in Pennsylvania:

# The compensation of the Highmark and IBC CEOs was commensurate with the rank of Highmark and IBC among Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans. For example, in 2007 the $3.6 million compensation of Highmark's Ken Melani was the fifth highest among all Blue plan CEOs, while Highmark was the fourth largest Blue. The $2.6 million compensation of IBC's Joseph Frick was the ninth highest among Blue CEOs, while IBC was the eighth largest Blue.

# Highmark and IBC executive compensation was generally substantially less than that of for-profit health insurers. Dr. Melani's $3.6 million and Mr. Frick's $2.6 million in 2007 compensation, for example, compared with Aetna's Ron Williams's compensation of $23 million and CIGNA's Ed Hanway's compensation of $25.8 million.

# Highmark and IBC executive compensation was in the same general range as that of the major non-profit hospital systems in Pennsylvania. For example, in 2006 -- the most recent year for which executive compensation for non-profit hospitals is available -- Dr. Melani received $3.2 million and Mr. Frick received $1.6 million, while the CEOs of Jefferson Health System, the University of Pennsylvania Health System, and UPMC received $1.7 million, $3.5 million, and $4.0 million, respectively.

Read more from the report at the link below:

Insurance Department Releases Report on Executive Compensation at State's Largest Blues' Plans

American Legion: Veterans want no part of Obamacare

The national commander of the nation's largest veterans service organization says military and veterans health care should not be part of any national health care bill.

Reacting Barack Obama's urgent call for immediate Congressional approval of a government-run health care system, American Legion National Commander David K. Rehbein issued the following statement:

"While The American Legion appreciates the complexity of the health care reform challenge facing the President and Congress, on behalf of our nation's 26 million veterans and the nearly 2 million personnel now on active duty in more than 130 countries, we urge Congress to ensure that veterans' and military health care not be part of any national health care bill. They should be exempt in the legislation."

Rehbein added, "Our nation must maintain its long standing tradition that veterans' and military health care systems will remain independent and focused on our most deserving citizens.

"The American Legion has a proud tradition of securing and preserving the earned benefits of America's veterans," continued Rehbein. "Ensuring timely access to quality health care for today's military and veterans is of paramount concern. These are the citizens who have borne our battles in previous wars as they still are in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have earned our care the hard way. We, as a nation, have an obligation to ensure that their health care is not compromised," he concluded.
With a current membership of 2.6 million wartime veterans, The American Legion was founded in 1919 on the four pillars of a strong national security, veterans affairs, Americanism, and the mentoring of youth. Legionnaires work for the betterment of their communities through more than 14,000 posts across the nation.

For more information about the American Legion visit its Web site, www.legion.org

What about the lawyers?

Conspicuously missing from the current debate on reforming health care in the United States is the role of lawyers and frivolous lawsuits in driving up the cost of medical care. Maybe it's because so many members of Congress and the Obama Administration are themselves lawyers. This letter to the editor, originally published in The Pottstown Mercury, raises some good questions.

Tort reform is a crucial element of reforming U.S. health care

Wouldn't it be nice if President Obama's 10-year, $634 billion health care plan (revised to $1.5 trillion and growing) could be enacted without burdening the taxpayer with so much as one additional dollar? Actually, it can ... with billions to spare.

In 2006, the annual Tort Tax on our economy was estimated at $865 billion*. This is the equivalent of a $9,800 tax on a family of four.

What is the Tort Tax? Simply put, it is a combination of "static costs" such as jury awards and attorney fees, and, "dynamic costs" which include such things as defensive medicine, lost productivity due to preventable illness and death, and foregone innovation.

In today's America, "better mouse traps" languish in R&D or are licensed overseas as a direct result of our predatory litigation climate. In the area of healthcare, this translates into thousands of needlessly lost lives.

The cost of defensive medicine, those unnecessary tests and procedures designed to mitigate malpractice claims, is estimated at over $125 billion per year. This burden forces some 3.4 million Americans onto the rolls of the uninsured. Just cutting this unnecessary expense in half would make a sizable down payment on the President's healthcare initiative.

Any health care plan which does not include tort reform as "the" central component is not to be taken seriously. While the outright regulation of attorney fees would be premature, a good start would be the adoption of "Loser Pays" tort reform and the replacement of juries with panels comprised of judges. These measures have worked exceedingly well elsewhere on the globe in reducing the tort tax. Noticeably excused however from White House "strong-arming" at a recent healthcare summit was trial attorney representation.

The question that we should be asking of our elected representatives, in my case attorneys all, is this: What have you done to place the financial and physical well-being of your constituents before the interests of your fellow attorneys? To date, the answer is, nothing. A specific examination of Obama, Specter and Casey fundraising coffers reveals why. Not a one would hold public office today without the largesse of a 1-800-LAW-SUIT industry predisposed to crippling our healthcare system and our economy.

*Source Material: "The Tort Tax"/WSJ/March '07/Authors McQuillan & Abramyan

MARK FURLONG
North Coventry

Just imagine government-run healthcare

Republicans have an alternative to Obama's socialized medicine proposal:

From the weekly GOP radio address by Rep. Roy Blunt:

"Americans are worried about their access to quality, affordable health care and they are looking for responsible solutions. Republicans agree, and we are committed to developing new and innovative solutions to fix what's broken, while making sure that we keep what works.

"Republicans are committed to access, affordability, competition and a quality system that puts patients and doctors in the driver seat.

"Just imagine a health care system that looks like a government run operation most of us are all too familiar with -- the local DMV. Lines, paper work, taking a number. Or how about another government agency -- the IRS.

"I don't want our health care to resemble that system and you probably don't either. That's why real competition is the key -- it encourages innovation so that the health care treatments and services available to you are the ones that you need and you want. Republicans are committed to common-sense solutions that promote competition and innovation.

"Not surprisingly the government never gets the price right: overpaying for some services, underpaying for others. It's also a system that leads to unfair rationing of care.

"Part of that comes from the backward way the government looks at problems. Washington is the only place that tells you how much they care about something based on how much it costs, instead of how well it works.

"America has the best doctors, health care providers and hospitals in the world. Republicans will lead the effort to make health care work for Americans. We'll also lead the fight against any proposals that undermine your ability to get the treatment the doctor you choose recommends."

Survey: 53% of Americans Say Family Skimped on Medical Care Because of Cost

Everyone agrees our health care system is broken, but is more government control and government rationing the way to fix it? That's what Obama is pushing.

Isn't the system broken largely because of government interference?

More Than Half of Americans Say Family Skimped on Medical Care Because of Cost in Past Year; Worries About Affordability and Availability of Care Rise

More uninsured under Rendell

The Rendell administration says there are more than 1 million Pennsylvania residents who lack health insurance.

That's a 7.5 percent increase from the number of uninsured in 2004, the last time the state Insurance Department conducted a survey.

Rendell has been governor since 2003. Why hasn't he done something about the number of uninsured? Why have hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians lost health coverage during Rendell's tenure?

The bottom line is that the uninsured have never been a priority for Rendell.

When he wanted to raise the state income tax in 2003, he got it passed in the Legislature. When he wanted to legalize slots in 2004, he won approval in the Legislature. When he wanted the pay raise approved in 2005, he got the votes. Same goes for his massive budgets that have now put the state into debt.

Making sure working families have health insurance is not a priority for Rendell.

The Health Department says that while nearly 18 percent have been uninsured for more than five years, so it's not like Rendell didn't know about the problem.

And the problem might be worse that what the state is reporting because the survey was conducted a year ago. The economy has gotten worse and more people have lost jobs and health coverage.

More Pennsylvanians Are Without Insurance and Health Care, Insurance Department Survey Shows

'Bigger is not always better'

Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner Joel Ario today praised the decision of the state's two giant Blue Cross insurance carriers to cancel a planned merger.

"Pennsylvania consumers already face one of the least competitive health insurance marketplaces in the country and this consolidation would have made it worse, resulting in fewer choices for consumers and weaker provider networks for consumers who depend on those networks for access to quality health care," said Ario.

What Ario didn't say is that the policies of the Rendell administration and decisions by the state Legislature have led to the poor health insurance climate for Pennsylvania consumers.

Insurance Commissioner Welcomes Withdrawal of Proposed IBC/Highmark Consolidation

Manufactured Health Insurance Crisis?

Average Americans Without Health Insurance Are Young and Healthy With Above Average Incomes

Columnist: Reject insurance merger

David Balto, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, is urging Pennsylvania regulators to turn down the proposed merger of the state's two giant Blue Cross insurance carriers.

While the merger would be good for the Blues bottom line, "it would bring higher prices, less coverage and payment delays" for consumers, Balto argues.

Balto notes that health-insurance premiums have risen by more than 87 percent in the past five years. Would less competition do anything to bring down those costs?

Read the full column at The Philadelphia Inquirer Web page.

Newspaper: Reject Blues merger

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is urging the Rendell Administration to reject a proposed merger of Pittsburgh's Highmark Inc. and Philadelphia's Independence Blue Cross.

Combined, the Blues cover 70 percent of Pennsylvania residents.

From a Post-Gazette editorial:

We aren't convinced that the merger would help patients who face escalating costs for premiums or make it easier for employers to negotiate improved coverage for their workers. In addition, given the increases in the state and national unemployment rates, the estimated loss of 1,200 jobs that is expected to result from a merger couldn't come at a worse time.

The Philadelphia Inquirer has also urged rejection of the Blues merger, as has the Pennsylvania Senate Banking and Insurance Committee.

The final decision is up to state Insurance Commissioner Joel Ario, a Rendell appointee.

Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.

Newspaper: Reject insurance merger

Pennsylvania's largest newspaper is urging the Rendell Administration to block a planned merger of the state's two giant Blue Cross health insurers.

Less competition will mean higher insurance costs for Pennsylvania residents, argues The Philadelphia Inquirer.

From an editorial in today's edition:

Combining Independence Blue Cross, which dominates the Philadelphia region, with Highmark, which dominates the Pittsburgh region, would create a behemoth whose claws grip nearly 70 percent of the state's health-insurance market.

Such dominance would frighten potential competitors from even thinking about entering or expanding in Pennsylvania. As a result, hospitals, doctors and employers in this state would remain at the mercy of an even bigger insurance giant.

The Blues have already been passing along double-digit rate increases to consumers for several years. Without the threat of any competition, the likelihood of future rate increases would grow even larger.

The newspaper cautions the Blues have a lot of political clout: "It isn't easy to stand up to the politically powerful Blues - Blue Cross of Philadelphia and Highmark Inc. of Pittsburgh. But it's the right move for consumers, who would benefit too little from the deal as it is currently structured."

Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.

Expert: McCain health plan is better

Robert Carroll, former deputy assistant secretary for tax analysis at the U.S. Treasury, and now vice president for economic policy at the Tax Foundation, examines John McCain's health care plan and comes to some interesting conclusions.

Despite the Obama propaganda, the McCain plan would benefit nearly every segment of the U.S. population, Carroll argues.

Read the full op-ed, "Almost Everyone Would Do Better Under the McCain Health Plan, at The Wall Street Journal Web site.

Obama caught in another lie

When Barack Obama says he's going to cut taxes for "95 percent of Americans," he really means he's going to raise taxes for most of the Middle Class and small business owners.

When Barack Obama says he's going to end the war in Iraq, he's really saying he's going to expand the war in Afghanistan and into Pakistan.

When Barack Obama says he's going to solve the energy crisis in 10 years, he's really saying he will raise taxes on most forms of energy, including gasoline and electricity while his energy czar, Al Gore, figures out how to save polar bears.

You get the picture. The man has been known to tell a lie or two.

When Barack Obama says his government-run health care program will lower the cost of health insurance, he's really saying you'll not only end up paying more for health care, you'll have to wait in line to see a doctor like they do in Canada and Europe.

James C. Capretta, writing at National Review Online, says it's Obama's health-care plan that will push people out of the job-based coverage they now have. That means more Americans will lose health coverage and be forced into government-run programs if Obama gets his way.

From Capretta's column:

In recent days, Barack Obama and Joe Biden have been throwing stones at the health care plan of Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Coinciding with new TV ads being aired in battleground states, the Democratic ticket is trying to alarm voters with claims that the McCain plan would force higher costs onto some households and unravel job-based insurance.

Both of these criticisms are demonstrably not true of the McCain plan. But they are true of Obama’s own plan. Independent estimates show an Obama-like scheme would push tens of millions of workers and their families out of employer-sponsored insurance — and the workers would be powerless to stop it.

Read the full column, "Obama's Glass House," at National Review Online.

Newspaper: Reject insurance merger

Pennsylvania residents have until Oct. 10 to express their opinion on the proposed merger of the state's two giant Blue Cross insurance companies.

Comments should be sent to Robert Brackbill, Chief, Company Licensing Division, Pennsylvania Insurance Department, 1345 Strawberry Square, Harrisburg, PA 17120. The fax number is 717-787-8557. Brackbill's e-mail is: rbrackbill@state.pa.us

The state's biggest newspaper, The Philadelphia Inquirer, says the merger offers few benefits to state consumers, already paying some of the highest health insurance rates in the country because of the lack of competition in Pennsylvania.

From an Inquirer editorial:

After listening to all the differing views on the proposed merger of Pennsylvania's two Blue Cross giants, the state Insurance Department recently got an unbiased report that concluded customers and health-care providers would benefit more if the two Blues would compete rather than merge.

The 192-page report by LECG Inc., an independent health-economics firm hired by the Insurance Department, says that competition between Independence Blue Cross and Highmark Inc. would result in lower premiums and better deals for health-care providers.

The report's findings are supported by basic economics and common sense, and should be taken seriously.

The impact on competition is the key factor that Insurance Commissioner Joel Ario must weigh in deciding whether to approve or reject the proposed merger. Now, Ario's own independent consultant has helped make the case against the merger.

Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.

Poll: Physician split on universal health care

The Democratic Party is promising universal health care coverage for all Americans, although nobody is willing to say who will pay for the program.

A new survey of doctors shows that many are skeptical of the concept of "universal health care" or whether it would improve medical care for their patients.

Physicians were asked if they believe that universal health care insurance will significantly improve access to health care for all Americans by DoctorDirectory.com Inc. The results of the survey? About 38% of doctors indicated no improvement while 33% of physicians feel that it would significantly improve access to health care. More than 44 feel that there is no evidence to support that expanding insurance coverage is a cost-effective way to promote health.

Read more from the survey at the link below:

Study Polls Physician Views on Universal Healthcare

A couple of questions for Rendell and Casey

I hope Gov. Ed Rendell and Sen. Bob Casey Jr. are having a good time in the Mile High City.

It sounded like they were enjoying themselves Tuesday when both spoke at the Democratic National Convention. Rendell and Casey, who collectively have held public office for more than 50 years, took a lot of shots at President Bush and Republicans.

Earlier in the day, the U.S. Census Bureau released its annual survey measuring poverty and health insurance coverage.

The poverty level remained unchanged in 2007 and the number of uninsured Americans declined by 1.3 million in 2007. There was no mention of the report at the convention because Democrats keep harping about poverty and health coverage. They wouldn't want a dose of reality messing up their tired rhetoric.

But I do have a couple of questions for Gov. Rendell and Sen. Casey.

The Census Bureau reported that the 11.6 percent of Pennsylvania residents are living below the poverty level. How can that be when we've had such stellar leadership under Rendell and Casey?

Rendell has increased state spending by $8 billion since he took office in 2003. Where did that money go? Why wasn't it used to help bring more Pennsylvanians out of poverty?

The Census Bureau listed the median income in Pennsylvania at $48,576. The national average is $50,740. Pennsylvania ranks No. 26 in the nation. Why do Pennsylvania families earn less than the national median? If Rendell and Casey are champions of the working people (as they frequently remind us), why are so many Pennsylvanians struggling?

Rendell says there are 800,000 Pennsylvanians without health care coverage. The number of uninsured Pennsylvanians has grown each year Rendell has been in office. Yet he has failed to reduce that number since taking office in 2003. If it's such a crisis, why hasn't Rendell given the matter a greater priority?

Just wondering.