MY POSITION ON HEALTH-CARE:

     I am 100% against the Obama Health-Care Plan.

   If elected, I will devote my energies to every stratagem I can devise to defund and reverse this legislation.

   If we win the House of Representatives this fall, we will be able to stymie the law by blocking funding. Then we must take back the Senate ASAP and elect a Republican President in 2012 so that we can pass new legislation and have it survive a Presidential veto. (Which is inevitable until we 'Put Out The Trash' at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.)

   A reasonable substitute plan would focus on Tort Reform, allow the purchase of Health Insurance across state lines, prevent give-aways to illegal aliens, and reduce pharmaceutical costs by allowing importation of low-cost drugs. We would also tighten up on fraud and waste by encouraging "Whistleblower" Reporting, decrease overhead costs by eliminating the FDA and most federal government involvement in health care. We would privatize Medicare/Medicaid and institute "consumer rewards" for compliance with body weight, blood pressure & blood sugar norms; and successful completion of health education courses. We would utilize online & telephone health panels for pre-Emergency Room problem screening and employ nurse risk-managers to track medical compliance in high-risk patients. (Not as a privacy-invasion, but as a condition for favorable health premiums). We would also trend toward physician bonuses based on medical "outcomes" rather than mere services rendered. Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) would be encouraged.

HEALTH CARE POLITICS: 

8/4/10 - Missouri Voters Reject Obama-Care!

7/6/2010: It's Here! ~ Health Provisions Kick-In

*Doctors Facing 21.3% Medicare Pay-Cut. (5/27/10)

*TRUTH OUT ~ OVERHAUL TO EXCEED ... $1 TRILLION

CLAIMS HEALTH BENEFITS OF NEW PLAN "FOR MILLIONS." (Update: 5/8/10)

Mar. 22/2010: Well, what can I say? I was there in D.C. (see "D.C. PROTEST" & "ObamaCare Passes"). ObamaCare still passed despite the best efforts of The GOP and all The Patriots who demonstrated against it. But it's not over. As we speak various challenges, legal and otherwise are underway. Keep the faith. /Bill

 HEALTH BILL PASSES IN HOUSE.

DEMS POST FINAL BILL ONLINE:

... (HERE IT IS).  

Listen to Judge Andrew Napolitano on Govt. Health-Care overreach.

Jan-Feb 2010: I've practiced medicine in three countries and seven of our United States for more than the last 40 years ~ as a pathologist, medical examiner, emergency room doctor, FP/obstetrician, disaster responder, disability examiner, general physician and attorney. I've worked for hospitals, medical groups, myself, the military, the civilian government and law-firms in every capacity from intern to Medical Expert to Medical Chief of Staff and Medical Director. I've logged my hours in environments ranging from thousand bed hospitals to FEMA trailers & Frontier Communities where I was the only physician in the entire county; and I've observed the evolution of medicine for more than 50 years as I watched my father, grandfather, grand-uncle and brother practice various specialties of our profession in all sorts of surroundings from premier teaching hospitals to third-world scenarios. And I can tell you that America is in a heap o' trouble if Obama Care passes.

History will look back at this time in our Nation with a sense of horror and consternation that unfair criticism of the health-care system and vague promises of "Change" unjustifiably sounded the call for even bigger federal government, more taxes, and destruction of the best health-care system in the world.

The present health system needs improvement: Yes, it’s expensive and there are some gaps. But the politicians’ proposed alternative to our current Free Enterprise System with its inherent Freedom of Choice is to replace it with inefficient Government Bureaucracy and legally mandated rationing of services.

Of course, they’re not telling it quite like that: Some have called the plan option "Universal Health Care." (And although that situation appears temporarily defeated, the long-term effect of the current health care legislation will be to bring it to pass). But we all know that there’s no "Free-Lunch," not even for health-care. In life, you get what you pay for. (Unless you're a thief). And Health-Care is no exception: You can’t receive more benefits than you purchase. (Unless you steal them). As Health-Care Consumers, you must ultimately foot the bill ~ from your pay-check ~ voluntarily, or through higher taxes! (Unless you steal someone else's money through unfair taxation).

If the government takes over the current system, in addition to paying higher taxes, you will lose your freedom to choose: freedom to choose health-plans, providers, brand-name medications and therapeutic options. The new government of "Change" will raise your taxes to foot the bill, then deny you services and tests like MRIs because they’re deemed "Not Medically Necessary" ~ despite your doctor’s request! Instead, the money will go to pay the salaries of federal bureaucrats, cover waste & inefficiencies, off-load bona-fide business costs onto the tax system and fund services for uninsured folks, many of whom will get a free-ride by gaming the system. Meantime, your care will be delayed or cancelled as services are cut back & denied, as hospitals are downsized, as "routine care" is scheduled into the distant future and as expensive pharmaceuticals are restricted ~ all in the name of efficiency and cost reduction. It happened in Britain; it happened in Canada; it’ll happen here too. You’ll get all the office visits you want with the harassed primary care physician to whom you’re inflexibly assigned; but it’ll be a revolving door with little or none of the efficiency, convenience, safety and expensive specialty care you are accustomed to receiving now.

Don’t believe in the myth of free Medical Care for all. And don’t pay more taxes to get less coverage.

Under existing government regulations all patients ~ with our without health insurance ~ must be seen upon presenting to any E.R.: You already paid that hidden "tax" for the uninsured when you settled your last hospital bill.

You did your duty. Leave it at that. No more taxes. Instead, let’s improve what we’ve got. But don’t make things worse: Oppose Obama Health Care.

Dr. BILL ESCOFFERY

P.S. Also join me in encouraging good old American private Christian Charity to bridge the Health-Care gap, assist needy fellow citizens and get the government out of our hair!

MORE HEALTH CARE ISSUES

•OBAMA LIE: C-SPAN TRANSPARENCY

•$400 BILLION TAKEN OUT OF MEDICARE

•THE PUBLIC OPTION

•UNFUNDED MEDICAID EXPANSION

•SENATOR BEN NELSON’S NEBRASKA "CORNHUSKER KICKBACK" & THE "LOUISIANA PURCHASE"

•TAXING ‘CADILLAC’ HEALTH PLANS, EXCEPT THE UNIONS!

•THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL MANDATORY INSURANCE PURCHASE REQUIREMENT

•ABORTION FUNDING

•TORT REFORM

•PURCHASING INSURANCE ACROSS STATE LINES

•PHARMA

OBAMA LIE: C-SPAN TRANSPARENCY

Everyone now knows that during the Obama presidential campaign, he, as candidate, promised to change the tone of partisan politics in Washington and in particular to ensure an increased level of legislative transparency. In this regard Obama absolutely committed to openness during the upcoming health care negotiations, prior to formulation and passage of any Healthcare bill. And in particular, on multiple occasions, the president himself guaranteed that the health care deliberations would be carried on for everyone to see with coverage on C-SPAN throughout the proceedings. But we now know that despite multiple requests by the management of C-SPAN and with nothing but scorn for the resulting loud public protest, this has not occurred. Even worse, the Republicans legislators and all outside parties have been totally banned from the secret democrat negotiations!

THERE IS NO OTHER CONCLUSION TO BE REACHED THAN THAT THE PRESIDENT IS A MONUMENTAL LIAR!

$400 BILLION TAKEN OUT OF MEDICARE

Although no member of the public really knows what is in the Healthcare plan because of the incredibly complexity and excessive paperwork, the deal making, paranoid secrecy and unpredictable long-term interactions and repercussions of the various convoluted provisions, it appears quite likely that senior citizens will be severely disadvantaged by that portion of the plan which provides that $400,000,000,000.00 will be removed from Medicare funding. Of course it is said that this will be made up by savings from eradicating “waste and fraud”. But it is difficult to see how the government will achieve this given the fact that the current levels of “waste and fraud” represent 40 years of governmental supervision of the Medicare program to date! It is more than likely that this provision will just merely lead to more severe rationing of care for the elderly.  And don’t forget that Obama famously said we should just give granny “the pain pill” rather than undertaking any substantive health care for her if she is of an advanced age.  Moreover “Obama care” has significant provisions for “end of life counseling”, which is merely a euphemism for euthanasia. So I guess the endpoint here is that the government just plans to kill off the elderly rather than wasting any scarce health care resources on them. 

Is this really the America we grew up in?

THE PUBLIC OPTION

The so called “Public Option” is one of the most heated issues of debate in “Obama Care. The house version of the Bill absolutely mandated this provision which would in effect give the government total control of health care in America within a brief period of time; and would, by the way, allow unhindered governmental authority over an additional 16% of the nation’s heretofore capitalist economy. But due to significant resistance in the Senate and the hue and cry by the public at large, it seems likely that this provision will fail to make it as a fully developed requirement into the final bill. However there are a number of “Trojan horse” provisions and “trigger mechanisms” which may yet bring the public option to pass over time. Notable here are such things as the possibility of industry paying a relatively small fine and offloading their Healthcare burden onto a public alternative. Once this development is combined with an expanded Medicare and Medicaid patient base, the outcome would be virtual complete control of the Healthcare industry by government notwithstanding a few small private insurance holdouts which would then be taxed out of existence. Of course many large businesses are in favor of this outcome, because the fact that healthcare costs are borne by the employer tends to make our U.S. industry less competitive against economies such as the Japanese where healthcare costs are borne by “the government” (but actually funded through taxation). Thus it is far from certain that the public option will not come to fruition over a period of time given the fact that the actual details of this “stealth” health plan are currently unknown to the public.

UNFUNDED MEDICAID EXPANSION

Under Obama-Care all those eligible for Medicaid would be forced to enroll in the program. There are also indications that the Medicaid “eligibility” would be expanded to include higher income brackets. Thus a significant part of the cost of “Obama-Care” would be offloaded onto state budgets; another accounting sleight of hand to decrease the apparent cost of the massive mandate and bankrupt states already on the edge financially.

SENATOR BEN NELSON’S NEBRASKA “CORNHUSKER KICKBACK” & THE “LOUISIANA PURCHASE”

One of the more unseemly and unsavory aspects of the current negotiations on health care legislation is the number of Senators who have been “bought off” with special deals to ensure their voting support for the plan. The most notable include deals cut with the likes of Senator Mary Landrieu from Louisiana (She’s receiving an additional $300,000,000.00 in federal aid for her state to purchase her vote) and Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska (who accepted a Medicaid funding deal which was not offered to the other 49 states: Under this deal, the nationally mandated Medicaid expansion would be paid for IN NEBRASKA ONLY by the federal government!)

 Landrieu Gets Pork:  http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a78Uz9zaIhBw

 “Cornhusker Kickback”  http://www.pagesixmag.com/p/news/local/gop_blasts_kickback_health_fix_dAelgwc0jXXhMD6fwB05IK

And there are a ton of additional “Sweetheart-Deals” documented in the N.Y. Post link “Cornhusker Kickback” above. It is also widely believed there may be many more secret deals currently concealed from the public which were negotiated to purchase the senate votes required to pass this legislation. It’s only slightly reassuring that a number of the deals may be (for example the “Cornhusker” gambit) unconstitutional; and as we speak resistance is mounting to this flagrant criminality and misuse of taxpayer funds. 

TAXING ‘CADILLAC’ HEALTH PLANS, EXCEPT THE UNIONS!

One of the ways that Obama is trying to cover the extra cost of the new governmental health care plan is to increase taxes throughout the system. For example there have been provisions for increased taxation on everything from plastic surgery to medical devices. A particularly bothersome episode evolved from attempts to tax so-called “Cadillac” health insurance plans. The Obama premise here was that since many of our citizens are already adopting a socialist mind-set, it would be politically astute to increase the taxes on “high end” health plans presumably carried by the likes of Wall Street executives against whom Obama has recently drummed up new levels of hatred and class envy. (It's interesting that Obama criticized John McCain for advocating a similar plan during the recent presidential campaign). But on getting into this issue more deeply, it turned out that a number of these plans were held by “Everyday Joes” as part of their union benefits!  Oh, Oh!  So this meant that if Obama was going to “fairly” tax all these “Cadillac plans” he would alienate a significant part of his voter base! Thus a secret deal-making compromise was achieved by the Obama administration whereby everyone with such “Cadillac” plans -- except for union members -- would be assessed the extra taxation! Of course this is another unconstitutional provision; and those of us who oppose it are encouraged that it may ultimately provide some legal leverage to defeat at least parts of the gargantuan health boondoggle.

THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL MANDATORY INSURANCE PURCHASE REQUIREMENT

Another unconstitutional part of the Obama health plan is a requirement that every citizen purchase health insurance or face a fine.  According to the experts this is a completely unconstitutional requirement under the takings clause of the Constitution and should provide additional fertile soil for an attack on the program. And as of 1/19/2010 the Florida Attorney General has threatened suit against this "Health Care Mandate" on the theory that it constitutes an unconstitutional "Living Tax" which penalizes people for not purchasing an unwanted service as a condition of citizenship; a requirement which cannot be coerced under the Commerce Clause.

ABORTION FUNDING

One of the hotly contested issues in the Obama Healthcare plan is government funding for abortion. Under the House version it was mandatory that this service be provided and paid for by the public at large. In the Senate it appeared as though the requirement was defeated and, according to vague reports of the secret reconciliation proceedings, the House seems likely to remove this requirement. However, the outcome is uncertain, and we absolutely could find ourselves required to fund the murder of unborn children from the public coffers -- with our tax money -- which would represent a new tightening of the ratchet in the modern American death march to extinction.

TORT REFORM

There is no doubt that one of the major missed opportunities in the current health care reform is “tort reform”. The possibility of being sued for transactional events, minor errors, and unpreventable adverse medical outcomes; and the corollary need for “malpractice insurance”; plus pressure for “unnecessary” testing -- all significantly increase the expense of health care in America without improving the quality of care. The contingency fee (known only in America) whereby plaintiffs’ attorneys collect up to a third of the awards given to injured clients, is a travesty of justice driving up our health care costs. The outcome of this contingency fee in the marketplace is that an injured patient does not invest a dime in the resulting litigation and is spared from all financial hazards. Instead, fly-by-night, “Malpractice” plaintiffs’ attorneys invest their funds in questionable litigation, knowing that if they take enough cases they are likely to cover their losses and come out with an overall investment profit. Moreover in the United States there are little or no penalties for unwarranted litigation. The unsuccessful plaintiff is not forced to pay court costs or in any way reimburse the Healthcare nor Legal systems (except in severely egregious cases). Often, in fact (if the plaintiff’s attorney sues a significant number of healthcare entities in one case) the Med-Mal carrier makes a financial decision to just pay the suit off with relatively small contributions from all parties – irrespective of the merits – to avoid the crippling defense costs. When you consider that these cases are mostly filed in state court where the attorneys have contributed financially to the elected Judges’ political campaigns -- or even go so far as to outright bribe the judges with direct cash payments -- you can understand what a scam the entire process has become! (See for eg., details of the Dickie Scruggs Case).

In countries like Canada by comparison, where there is no contingency fee, unsuccessful plaintiffs must frequently bear all the costs of litigation and the plaintiffs’ attorney must charge a standard professional fee rather than take a percentage of any award. The dampening effect of these rules leads to a significant reduction in legal Healthcare costs.

It would be a simple matter to change the law in this country: Besides abolishing the contingency fee, there are a host of other improvements such as medical review panels and caps on pain & suffering awards which already reduce the transactional cost of medical care in states like Indiana and could have a tremendous impact nation-wide. But you can understand why the Obama administration has declined to make any meaningful inroads into this scam because of the significant financial support for democrat candidates from the likes of the American trial lawyers association (ATLA) and other special-interest attorney groups. In fact, indications are that the Obama Health plan financially discriminates against states that already have these deterrents in place!

 PURCHASING INSURANCE ACROSS STATE LINES

One of the obvious solutions to the high cost of health care insurance which the Obama administration has steadfastly refused to recognize is the possibility of purchasing insurance “across state lines”. Is clearly apparent that cheaper insurance rates exist in many out-of-state markets and that larger insurance cooperatives should be able to provide cheaper insurance rates. The savings would be translated to most citizens’ bottom line if the Obama administration allowed health insurance coverage to be purchased across state lines. However, since this would strengthen the role of private enterprise in the American Healthcare equation and weaken the governmental component, the Obama administration has steadfastly refused to allow this alternative.

PHARMA

“PHARMA” is an association representing large drug manufacturers in the United States such as Merck and Pfizer corporations.  Surprisingly at the outset of the health care shenanigans they essentially bushwhacked patients and their doctors by joining in to support Obama care. In fact it was reported in the Wall Street Journal that they had budgeted to spend somewhere in the region of $150,000,000.00 to support the Obama strategy with TV advertising campaigns and the like. To fathom the reaction of PHARMA, you have to understand that big business is essentially amoral. They are fixated on the profit motive only. Thus the pharmaceutical industry largely opposed health care reform during the Clinton administration when it seemed likely to be defeated (AND threatened their profit-margin) but has supported reform on the Obama watch because of the possibility of cutting special deals which would protect their very existence (given the fact that these Obama folks are WAAY more dangerous than Hillary ever was) and save them from severe financial loss under the Obama plan. In particular the American pharmaceutical industry has negotiated for itself certain valuable protections in return for supporting Obama care.  For one thing Obama has guaranteed that they will not have to face a competitive price disadvantage from imported pharmaceuticals.  Obama also promised to limit the cost cuts that big PHARMA would have to take for its medicines under the Medicare reorganization.  Unfortunately it’s all about money, and what you’re seeing is the evolution of an economic system not just simply attempting to achieve Marxist socialism at a governmental level, but rather a system that more closely resembles “national socialism” under the likes of Adolf Hitler in the middle of the last century.  Thus, it is enlightening to understand, through the “teaching moment” of health care that we individual citizens and our small companies are not just facing the threat of governmental socialism in America today, but rather we are facing the intimidating menace of the combined force of big government and big business; constituting nothing less than a sort of left-wing Fascism.

As an aside, I’ll share with you my decision to bar all PHARMA representatives from my medical office and to undertake no programs in concert with them, ever since they declared in support of the Obama Healthcare plan. Of course, I'll ensure that my patients get whatever’s the best medicine they may need in my opinion, no matter who the manufacture may be. But, interestingly, in a surprising number of cases patients can benefit from non-PHARMA products, often cheaper, better known medications which have been around and tried and trusted for longer periods of time. In any event, these PHARMA people are no longer welcome in my office and this will be a lifelong antagonism on my part as I will never forget that in our moment of need they ambushed and sacrificed my patients at the altar of their greed.

Sincerely,

Dr. Bill Escoffery