An Open Letter To President Obama On Health Care Reform And What It Means To My Family

An Open Letter To President Obama On Health Care Reform And What It Means To My Family

Mr. President:
I know that you are a very busy man so I will try to keep my questions about health care reform and the recently passed legislation as short and simple as possible.
- I could ask you why you fancy this is a good piece of legislation even though I truly rest assured that it will be a mistake and will come very close to bankrupting the country. The basis for my conclusion has void to do with political nepotism ( in fact, I have never voted for a Republican for national office in my life. ) From my perspective, " Obama Care " never effectively addressed the root causes of our escalating health care costs: Americans eat too much of the amiss kinds of food, they exercise far too little, they are chubby, they smoke too much, and they are getting older. This legislation does not directions these causes, it just raises taxes and moves money around within the bureaucracy. I could ask you about this but I will not.
- I could ask you why you have not stepped forward and denounced those in your party that have likened Americans congeneric myself, i. e. those that have legitimate and honest concerns about this health care reform bill, to the racists who fought against the civil rights movement from the 1960s. I thought that we lived in a free country where humankind could freely label their elected representatives without being slurred in the most debasing way possible, just for having a different theorem. Your deficiency of righteousness to oppose those Democrats who frequently use the term " racist " to calumniate myself and those Americans heavy their honest opposition, cheapens the honour and contributions of those from long ago that fought actual racism. I could ask you about this but I will not.
- I could ask you why you felt it vital to pass this legislation by the back door called reconciliation. This is a major, major nut in the country that will affect every American for decades to come. Offensive it in the back door, without using the regular, time gratifying tack of passing laws in his country, belittles the approach and makes it view not unlike it was forced through without the full weight of the democratic process behind it. I could ask you about this but I will not.
Here is what I will ask you about. But first, some skill facts:
- Let me reiterate that both my wife and myself have never voted for a Republican for national office in our lives.
- We both spent several decades of our lives working tough for AT&T, blushing several years ago, secure in our thinking that AT&T ' s promise of health care benefits and coverage for our long years of service was a good bet.
- We both try to eat well, we exercise at our local YMCA on an halfway daily basis, neither of us smoke, and we hardly drink. In other words, we take personal burden for our health and our health care.
One impetus for our personal boundness behavior is that we are on a high deductible insurance plan with AT&T. We are each under obligation for the first $1, 200 of our annual health care costs before we get any insurance coverage at all. However, for this personal fault, we also pay annihilation in annual premiums.
- During the debate leading up to the passage of health care reform, you reiterated more than once that those of us that currently had health care coverage would be able to keep it. However, in a recent article in Fortune magazine, the CEO of AT&T, Randall Stephenson, was interviewed ( several pages of the article are attached ). Towards the end of the call, he was explicitly asked whether AT&T would consider dropping health care insurance coverage for its employees and retirees. His response made it shiny that this was a very usage option for two reasons. First, from a business profitability perspective, subservient the new health care reform law, " you ' re better off paying the government a fine and dropping health care coverage for your employees ", practical AT&Ts bottom line. Second, he talks about " economic preponderance " which appears to be code words for " if others in his industry do it, AT&T will have no choice but to do it also. "
Thus, a few quick questions for you:
1 ) Were you just ingenuous when you made the comments that we could all keep our current health care insurance, not contemplation the simple actuality that companies are in business to make money and if this bill makes it easier for them to make more money by not insuring their workforce, that is what they will do? Or were you being disingenuous, knowing that this would happen and deliberately misinforming the country to help get your health care reform bill passed? Unworldly or disingenuous, in either case you will be making millions of American voters crummy in November and in 2012 when we are forced out of our current health care coverage and will blame you for either youth or arrogance in this setting.
2 ) I am 57 years elderly and my wife is 56 years senile and if Mr. Stephenson does decide to abolish AT&T ' s health care coverage for employees and retirees, where do you prompt that my wife and I get coverage? What insurance company is proposition to want to aggregate us up, and millions of other older Americans who kiss goodbye their coverage, at our ages even though we are both healthy and taking personal guilt for our gangling good health?
3 ) If we are forced out onto the market for health care insurance coverage, our new coverage is likely activity to be much more of value. Our annual health care costs will go from a maximum of $1, 200 each to a minimum of several thousand dollars each. Is this how you unborn to reduce health care costs for middle class America? Is so, then you need to explicate the math to me. Maximum of $1, 200 to a minimum of several thousand dollars, does not make bent out here in the real world. How does this reduce the escalating health care costs for the 90 % of Americans that even now had health care insurance prior to the aisle of this bill?
Thus, I am not dash to ask you about why you and the keep up of Congress did not address the root causes of high health care costs in your legislating process. I am not vigor to ask why you have sat back and been silent while those Americans with legitimate and honest dissent against this bill have been likened to racists by members of your party. I thought you represented all Americans, not just those that agreed with your policies. I will not ask you about why you did not have the courage and salt to pass this legislation the right way, through the front door approximating every other piece of legislation, but instead snuck it through the back door of reconciliation.
However, I will ask you or your staff to contact me and account for where and how I can get health care coverage at my age if AT&T and the rest of corporate America decides it is a better economic choice to pay a government fine than to cover their employees and retirees with health insurance. I will ask you to illustrate whether you were naive or disingenuous when explaining that we would be able to keep our current health insurance coverage. And conclusively, please manifest how paying no more than $1, 200 a year beneath my current coverage ( with many years paying extinction for coverage during healthy years ) is a better deal then decision new coverage at my age and paying several thousand dollars a year for the privilege.
Although I have written to the Bloodless Co-op many times, I have never manifest any answer to my questions on a wide variety of topics even though you promised to have the most open and responsive administration of all time. That has not happened yet. However, in this case I do miss, in truth I demand specific answers to my three questions considerable. For your political welfare I hope to receive those answers before early November and certainly before 2012.
Thank you for your time,
Walter " Bruno " Korschek
[Follow up note: a month after sending this to the Ivory Cubbyhole, no answers to the questions have been well-known or even a simple scrutiny that this letter was down pat has been later from the Obama adminstration. ]

Obama Plan Is Not For You? Postpone Your Foreclosure For Years With Simple Strategies!

Obama Plan Is Not For You? Postpone Your Foreclosure For Years With Simple Strategies!

It is no news that Mortgage Modification Program failed to deliver results it was intended to. Rigorous requirements prevented many homeowners from qualifying and getting help below Obama plan.
Banks and lending institutions were pumped up with millions in silhouette of government help to work with homeowners. Since intimacy in the program was voluntary, many institutions have decided that it is not worth for them to work with homeowners.
With recent announcements that the reformed Mortgage Modification Program is on the way, modified to help people, featuring less restrictive qualification criteria, it is insoluble to affirm, however, that it would kick in any time pdq. It seems allied the health care reform is the only thing on the legislative agenda today.
Homeowners Are Apart Without Government Help To Defend Their Rights
What it means to many homeowners is that more foreclosures are on the way, and people would project to lose their homes at an unheard before proportion. It looks compatible the mortgage holiday is far from the end, as foreclosures perdure to rise significantly in some states. There are some solutions homeowners may adopt to delay foreclosure and to fight for their homeownership rights.
There Are Proven Strategies In Place
Regardless of your income or employment position there are proven strategies that can be used to delay foreclosure, in many cases for several years. Loopholes in legislative acts own you to buy yourself more time to stay in your home.
Most commonly used strategies to delay foreclosure consist of:
Preparing a well - documented Letter of Hardship;
Requesting and adjourning gavel jockey hearings for years;
Using mistakes in housing papers to your advantage;
Filing a bankruptcy, if no other options are of help anymore.
Courts And Laws Are The Best Help In Delaying Foreclosure
Having your case reviewed by the hard rapper is one of the most effective strategies to delay foreclosure for years. Winning the hard rapper case is not the major idea; it is keeping the legality flurry for as long as legally possible that would help you to stay in your home for years.
Finding errors in the housing contract is higher effective way to fight for your rights. Doing uniform requires some erudition of laws, and is typically performed with the help of a lawyer. This strategy has proven to be highly effective by many homeowners.
Properly implemented defense strategies outlined ultra are a great tool aimed to help homeowners to delay foreclosure for many years without the need to make mortgage payments at all. Most of these may be used without using any help of a lawyer and no money out of pocket.

An Open Letter To President Obama - Seeking Unity But Sowing Disunity

An Open Letter To President Obama - Seeking Unity But Sowing Disunity

I commence your words on national unity, at the end of your recent speech on the Afghanistan contention, both empty and frustrating:
" This vast and varied citizenry will not always grant on every topic – nor should we. But I also know that we, as a country, cannot sustain our leadership nor navigate the thrust challenges of our time if we allow ourselves to be split asunder by the corresponding aversion and disbelief and patronage that has in recent times poisoned our national discourse.
It is easy to forget that when this contest began, we were united – bound together by the fresh reflection of a eccentric dirty deed, and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. I refuse to accept the concept that we cannot impart that unity further. I understand with every fiber of my being that we – as Americans – can still come together behind a common purpose. For our values are not wittily words written into parchment – they are a creed that calls us together, and that has carried us through the darkest of storms as one nation, one people. "
Here you are utopian and yearning for unity but your actions and silence broadcast disunity:
- When Americans were rising up and demanding answers to unclear health care reform issues and legislation, you condescended to those in disagreement and told them to stop " dissension ", as if they were children scrap over the last piece of cake.
- When Air Force One and an accompanying Air Force doughboy made very low flight passes over New York Vicinity, causing hysteria and bugbear in those New Yorkers on the ground who were reliving the hateful memories of the 9 - 11 attacks, you displayed an conceited insensitivity by working the incident into a pun you told several days successive at a reception.
- When Nancy Pelosi called those in disagreement with health care reform plans " un - American ", you were silent.
- When Democratic Congressman Grayson of Florida called all Republicans " knuckle dragging Neanderthals ", you were silent.
- When one of your czars, Van Jones, called all Republicans a - - h - - - s in a public forum in Berkley that was captured on videotape and YouTube, you were silent.
- When Henry Reid stated publicly that American tourists, the very taxpayers that pay Congressional salaries, physically smell when they visit the nation ' s Finance in the summer, your were silent.
- When Pelosi and Reid and a small cabal of Democrats took the health care reform legislation tug behind closed doors and into quick, no review votes, bypassing formal, meaningful, and democratic debate, you were silent.
- While you graciously and quickly accepted the discomfort of Congressman Joe Wilson who yelled out " Liar " during your health care speech to Congress, when Pelosi went for a hit of backer flesh by censuring the Congressman, you were silent.
- When ACORN came subservient the eye for voter registration and child prostitution shenanigans and harm of taxpayer money, you were silent.
National unity often manifests itself in one of two ways. First, an rousing tragedy approximating as the onslaught on Pearl Harbor or the 9 - 11 attacks can trial a sphere together. Second, a great rector such as Churchill in World Combat II or President Kennedy ' s Camelot vision can strain the citizenry together for a greater purpose. However, allowing comrade dudes to be called a - - h - - - s, un - American, smelly, knuckle dragging Neanderthals is no way to become a great officer of a unified nation. By conversation to American adults as if they were children, telling them to stop scrap when they were only freely expressive their opinions and concerns is no way to become a great head of a unified nation. Making light of American fears by telling a yarn about an incident that negatively impacted a lot of people is no way to become a great herald of a unified nation.
In less than a year you went from an lick ranking over 70 % to an catechism classifying underneath 50 %, not whereas you made difficult and chivalrous decisions but thanks to your were silent, condescending, and insensitive. Identical a high trial rating provided an unprecedented opportunity at national unity that you dream for. You disoriented that historic opportunity when you went from being the bright side for a better national future to becoming just added partisan politician close the rest of the political class in Washington. What a ignomity.

Health Care Reform - Will Dr Obama Be Able To Cure The Us Health System?

Health Care Reform - Will Dr Obama Be Able To Cure The Us Health System?

Let ' s pretend that President Obama is actually Dr Obama, and that his job is to diagnosticate and treat the US Health System. What will he find, how will he go about it, and what will be the outcome?
The process of diagnosis is relatively straight forward. Everyone acknowledges that the system is shattered and that there are a number of agreed on symptoms of this disorder. Firstly the system is far too high-priced, consuming midpoint twice as many dollars per capita as health systems in other Western countries. And this equivalent is also sick focused. Over thirty per cent of our health dollars are spent on administrative non - patient care costs ( analogous as insurance companies costs and profits, and excessive administrative costs for providers ). We also spend twice as much on medications as other Western countries, and our reimbursement practices inappropriately reward piece degree medicine, particularly doctors who perform interventions, ( approximating as surgeons and radiologists ) instead of undertaking prevention and the treatment of chronic malady ( resembling as primary care physicians ). Of course the existence of 47 million uninsured is a disgrace and a huge hot potato, as is the relatively played out quality of overall care provided nationally for the money spent. And in consummation the whole system is very patchy, with excellence provided relatively cheaply in some areas, and the opposite in many others. All this occurs in the setting of relatively little investment in electronic medical records and modern information technology, which could certainly improve the system.
So what should Dr Obama do? What is his treatment plan? If he addresses some of the problems main, then the task becomes clearer. It is naturally needful to introduce some style of national public insurance program, both to safeguard the currently uninsured, and to outfit competition for the excessive number of health insurance companies to make them reduce their rates, increase their cover, and serve better assessment services. It is likely that this process will lead to many of the insurance companies force out of business, and that is fine, seeing there are way to many at modern, and it would be more analytical for us to have fewer better health insurance operations. At the duplicate time the cost of pharmaceuticals has to be addressed - there needs to be a nationally negotiated formulary for cynosure essential drugs that are paid out of the public purse.
At the duplicate time the payment structure for providers needs to be changed, and more emphasis paid for services for chronic indisposition and prevention, and less for interventional medicine, while also encouraging, as is vivacity, the use of electronic medical log systems and other health information technology initiatives. A single titillating garnish would come if he insisted on the introduction of a national health identifier number as this would glaringly lift the ability of providers to exchange health information when essential, and would remarkably make easy billing and administrative processes.
Many other things have to happen, of course, but will Dr Obama and his team be up to this task? We currently have a independent and inefficient health system, and in any commensurate system there are winners and losers. The winners in today ' s health system are insurance companies, the pharmaceutical industry, and big numbers of providers who are used to acceptance unusually high incomes for interventional services. The losers are patients, and the country. When looked at broadly, the diagnosis and treatment of our health system is actually relatively straightforward, but it has to be accepted that today ' s " winners " will not necessarily remain in that position long term, and that there will be a number of losers as we pocket money the system. Let ' s just security that Dr Obama, and his multidisciplinary health planning team in Congress, are able to push through the reforms the US health system needs so that the patient is no longer the dodo.

Illegal Immigrants And Health Care Reform Heat Up Obama ' s Speech

Illegal Immigrants And Health Care Reform Heat Up Obama ' s Speech

Recently, President Obama addressed the nation on live TV to talk about various hot topics including health care reform, undocumented immigrants and education. And his speech had it’s share of fireworks.
While discussing his plans and the matter of illegal immigrants getting health care, Rep. Joe Wilson, a Republican from South Carolina, became so outraged that he just couldn’t control himself any longer. He burst out yamp at President Obama, “You calumniation! ”
Poor construction aside, this incident just shows you how controversial these issues are and it goes right up the ladder to the Gray Joint. Regardless of where one stands on health care reform and undocumented immigrants, it can’t be argued that there’s a excise being payed by US taxpayers and the country.
In California, the Medi - Cal program pays out over $1 billion each year providing health care to undocumented immigrants—California Department of Health Care Services statistic. The state spends hundreds of millions more benevolent for illegal immigrants who are pregnant and of outing the children.
Of vagrancy, one of the issues is about good for for human beings. The other is about enforcing the law. One idea is to secure the brink to stop the flow of illegal immigration from the South, but care for those present here.
President Obama looks to be positioned to do zero. He doesn’t want to make things easier, but doesn’t want to make them harder either. It’s a inflexible affair indeed.
It’s worth noting that even those emergency lodgings might show a cost for treating undocumented immigrants, they are required by federal law to treat anyone regardless of class, documents, income, etc.

Obama ' s Hunt For A Bipartisan Fig Leaf On Health Care

Obama ' s Hunt For A Bipartisan Fig Leaf On Health Care

Over the course of 2009 conservatives and Republicans have done a far better job than anyone would have thought possible when it came to blocking ObamaCare from becoming law. Everyone thought it was a fait accompli, but it ran into the vermilion wall of public judgment.

In light of the recent elections in Virginia, New Jumper and Massachusetts, as well as his own falling poll numbers, Obama wants Republicans to come together with Democrats for a grand health care " summit " to search for a bipartisan result. In other words, he wants some cover.

But even as Obama and Democrat leaders have publicly pressured Republicans about gaze their summit, they ' ve spent hours in private backrooms planning to get around a Republican filibuster and pass their bill by resorting to the legislative trick of the budget reconciliation process.

So much for bipartisanship.

The actuality is that liberals are desperate. They ' ve seen the polls and they know that it ' s time for them to gain as much government as they can before voters have a chance to head to the polls and turn Washington on its ear this November.

They get that the current versions of the bill may not be their idea of liberal veracity, but it yea represents one of the best opportunities they ' ve ever had to lock in the biggest expansion of government in living thought. It means more bureaucrats, more government jobs, more regulations and more control over how people can live their lives. In short, it means power.

Liberal Democrats in politically " safe " districts and states are fixated on pressing ahead, pushed ever forward by their fundamental base. But, as Massachusetts Democrats recently form out, the belief of " safe " districts or states doesn ' t mean what it used to. A thought not irretrievable on more moderate Democrats in more marginal seats.

Each day seems to bring more retirement announcement by massed Democrat, new poll occurrence Republicans with big leads over amenable Democrats, and the American people growing increasingly opposed to Obama ' s programs. All of which makes it harder for Obama to convince enough Democrats to go along with his agenda, as they are all too aware that his name isn ' t on any ballots this fall.

When fettered Democrats equaling Senator Evan Bayh ( with over thirteen million dollars in the bank ) decide that it ' s too impending to run for re - picking, the writing is on the blockade.

But for considerate Democrats, the object is so tantalizingly stifling. Just credit of it - regulatory control over higher 1 / 6th of the US economy in an area that they can extrapolate out to virtually every angle of American life. ( Put that meek drink down! No more McDonalds for you! ) They ' ve come too deep-seated to turn back now.

As for Obama, he knows the Democrats are in for a beating at the polls this November, and he ' s in process supposition about his own re - selection. He will use health care " summit " and its waves as an opportunity to disingenuously delineate Republicans as being against any reform and on the side of groups Americans abomination, ( compatible insurance and pharmaceutical companies ).

For Republicans, this is no time for bi - patronage. Especially liable that bi - favouritism oftentimes means that Republicans go along with how liberal Democrats want to do things. They need to resist the urge to do situation other than demand that Obama, Pelosi and Reid go back to square one with health care. Current versions of the legislation should be unquestionably off the mess. Further, any more " comprehensive " bills should be known off - limits. " Comprehensive " is a Washington, DC euphemism for legislation that ' s easier to fill with things that the public would never approve of.

Instead, the GOP should demand a series of stand alone bills that promote issues twin as medical malpractice reform, allowing consumers to purchase insurance across state wares, and allowing small businesses to band together to buy insurance. Each of these are issues that are commonly unmentioned to have a tremendous impact on the cost of health care in America. And they ' re all supported by big majorities of the American public. Unlike ObamaCare.

Short of that, congressional Republicans shouldn ' t phobia being labeled as the " party of no ". There are worse things that they could be in the coming poll.

Just ask the Democrats.