ObamaCare: Define Success!

Local morning talk show host Dillon Honcoop noted that people focusing on the failure of the HealthCare.gov website were missing the big picture, namely that millions of people are losing their health insurance due to ObamaCare.

While I believe Dillon was correct as far he went, I think he is missing an even bigger picture: ObamaCare was never intended to succeed in the way you or I, or dozens of Democrats in the US legislature who voted for it, would define success.

The progenitors of ObamaCare measure success by the degree of chaos that it can cause in the health insurance and health care provider market. Because the ultimate goal is single payer, which will be much easier to implement when people are demanding relief from the bomb that is ObamaCare. Who knew?

I think Obama knew, Pelosi knew, probably Harry Reid, and a handful of other Democrats in the legislature knew. The rest of them were hornswoggled into believing that ObamaCare was this benevolent thing that would bring affordable health care to the masses. They were the useful idiots.

They were the useful idiots who didn't read the bill, because the bill was designed to be unreadable. Most of the text simply modifies arcane elements of other laws. It would take a team of lawyers months of research to make sense of it. The rest of them simply read the executive summary, assumed it was an honest representation of the bill's intent and scope, and voted on that basis.

President Obama famously said (numerous times), "If you like your plan, you can keep it. Period". That is now obviously false. Since I believe Obama knew, I'm calling this a lie. So, why would Obama lie? He had to lie, in order to make ObamaCare succeed in the way he wants it to succeed. You might say I'm a conspiracy theorist, but a week ago, you would have called me that for saying millions would lose their health care coverage. There's a big difference between conspiracy theory and conspiracy fact.

Petulant, Petty, Vindictive, Unstatesmanlike

Knowledge is Power, over at Sondrakistan posted the following image. See if you can guess what it is.

Cones are shown along the road to Mount Rushmore. The National Parks Service placed the
cones there to prevent viewers from stopping on the side of the road to view the monument.

Seriously? Is this the kind of unstatesmanlike conduct that we can expect from this regime?

Now before you pile on me about the "unstatesmanlike" conduct of the House "Tea Party" Republicans who "caused" this shutdown, let me remind you that many, if not most of those "Tea Party" Republicans were elected with a voter mandate to stop ObamaCare. They are now living up to their campaign promises - albeit much watered down at this point.

Our founders designed the separate branches of government and the bicameral legislature with checks and balances to discourage bad legislation from being enacted. Regardless of which side the issue you're on, or which piece of legislation you think is bad, that's what is happening today. The Constitution may be coughing up blood, but parts of it are still working.

The "Tea Party" Republicans had originally voted to fund all functions of government except ObamaCare. The senate Democrats rejected that out of hand. Now, all the "Tea Party" Republicans are asking is for ObamaCare to be implemented as written, equally for all citizens, with no exceptions. The senate Democrats rejected that out of hand.

The senate Democrats could have accepted either bill to keep the government from shutting down*, and then negotiate to fix whatever issues they have with ObamaCare. This whole thing had the potential of being a positive move for We the People by ironing out the truly bad elements of ObamaCare.

But instead, we get this petulant, vindictive "shut down" of services that require no actual service, limiting access to sites that we own. This isn't The King's Land, after all. This land is your land, this land is my land... This land was made for you and me.

So now, the NIST websites, including time services are closed. Are you kidding me? Those computers don't require any staff to operate them. And I'm pretty sure they're not powered down to save electricity during the "shut down". They're just reprogrammed to cause maximum inconvenience.

Barack Hussein Obama, you're the executive; these are your bureaucracies to manage. They're all closed to the public, but your ObamaCare sites are sort of working. You should be ashamed of yourself.

* Actually government isn't shut down; over 80% of it is still (dys)functioning quite nicely, thank you very much.

I'm Typhoid Mary

This video needs to go viral, and I'm the carrier. Call me Typhoid Mary.

I've never seen anyone cut to the chase as well as Bill Whittle.

IJ on the Individual Mandate

Institute of Justice constitutional law professor Elizabeth Price Foley, explains how Obamacare threatens centuries of Anglo-American contract law, and essentially gives the government tyrannical power over what agreements we may, may not, or must enter into.

The Supreme Court must strike down Obamacare, or it's the end of the line for individual liberty in this country. Read more...

I Feel As If I Am Being Attacked By My Own Government

I just sent off two letters to my state and federal legislators.

Dear [Patti Murray | Maria Cantwell | Rick Larsen]

Please vote NO on the healthcare bill. You do not want your fingerprints on this obscenity. It is unconstitutional, We the People don’t want it, and it is the most corrupt piece of legislation in American history. Selling judgeships, the congressional bribes, the backroom deals. It stinks on ice even if there are some token Republican proposals in there.

The measures are the exact opposite of the effective remedy: Less government, fewer mandates, more liberty. Follow the Constitution.

Vote NO unless you want to guarantee a Republican landslide in 2010.

Sincerely,
Karl Uppiano

And then there's this one to the state reps:

Dear [Dale Brandland | Doug Ericsen | Kelli Linville],

Please vote NO on a Washington State income tax. One of the reasons that I moved to Washington State was to get away from the hassle and expense of a state income tax. Democrats nationwide seem to have it in for productive citizens, and they seem unwilling or unable to control spending. I feel as if I am being attacked by my own government!

Increasing taxes during a recession is the absolute worst thing you can do. My employer is hanging by a thread as it is. Thousands of others are just like it. Many thousands of jobs are in the balance. You’re killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Like any economic principle, there is an optimum point for bringing in tax revenue. Above or below that tax rate, revenue decreases. The point shifts with the economic times. However, taxation and government is more oppressive than ever before in my lifetime. If you hope to retain your seat in the legislature, you need to vote NO on a Washington State income tax.

Sincerely,
Karl & Peggy Uppiano

We are truly living in a kakistocracy.

Don't Doubt It -- This is a Kakistocracy

The wheeling and dealing, outright bribery and political malpractice is simply shocking. This is kakistocracy on parade. Jefferson, Madison, Washington, et. al., would be shocked and saddened, but probably not surprised. They warned us about this.

Letter to Lindsey Graham

Dear Senator Graham,

I saw you On the Record with Greta last night. When you said that you would require Nancy Pelosi to promise to leave out certain provisions of the house health care bill in order to pass the senate, well sir, my jaw just dropped.

I cannot believe that you are going to gamble our liberty on Nancy Pelosi keeping a promise! Nancy Pelosi takes no prisoners. She will agree to anything to get what she wants, and once she gets it, will do whatever benefits her agenda. She is a lot like Yasser Arafat and Saddam Hussein in that regard.

Why not vote the bill down unconditionally, and take another run at it? We do need health care reform in this country (but it is NOT the highest priority -- think economy and energy instead). To be effective and protect our liberty, health care reform should be the EXACT OPPOSITE of the house bill! Here are my suggestions:

• NO Government Takeover of Health Care
• NO Public Option or co-ops or government run "exchanges" of any kind
• NO Mandates
• NO Vote for Cloture or other sleazy methods of getting the bill passed (i.e. reconciliation or attaching it as an amendment to another bill)
• YES to totally eliminating barriers to buying health insurance across state lines
• YES to real tort reform
• YES to genuinely decreasing the mandates on health insurance companies and policies so that smaller, more flexible companies and policies are allowed exist and compete
• YES to allowing everyone to claim tax credits for providing health insurance, from corporations to small businesses to those that are self employed
• YES to cracking open the potential of Health Savings Accounts (HSA's) by increasing the ceiling on maximum donations that each person can make each year
• YES to cafeteria style choices for all individuals or businesses, so that each consumer is at liberty to choose the insurance that he/she wants to pay for and meets their personal needs
• YES to allowing real freedom of choice for consumers who want to purchase high deductible policies in combination with an HSA or catastrophic policy
• YES to cutting out waste and fraud by VERIFYING the citizenship of everyone who receives an entitlement benefit
• YES to transparency and accountability - we want the entire bill, in its final legislative language put online for at least 72 hours prior to voting, as well as an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office being completed at least 72 hours before any voting is allowed to take place

Note that Nancy Pelosi DID NOT live up to her promise to give We the People 72 hours to read the bill before the house vote.

Sincerely,
Karl Uppiano

Hidden Cost of Socialized Medicine

My wife just had gallbladder surgery. Twenty years ago, she would have had a longer hospital stay, and come home with a nine-inch incision and six weeks' recovery time. Yesterday, she came home with four tiny holes in her belly where they sent in the fiber optic camera and the instruments. Her recovery instruction is "activity as tolerated". She has no sutures; just tape covering the wounds that will dissolve in a week or so.

I would say that is a tremendous leap in technology, driven by the private, free market. History teaches us that government control of anything tends to remove any incentive to innovate, advance the technology or improve service. Ironically, when the progressives take over health care, progress, and therefore patients, will suffer. We'll never even know what we're missing.

Now It's Personal

It has come to my attention that ObamaCare proponents want to specify the configuration of the most intimate part of the anatomy for every newborn American male. That's right; they are promoting circumcision to reduce the spread of AIDS. Typical of government activism, it is a laudable goal and a lousy implementation.

Dear reader, we know what spreads AIDS, and it isn't foreskins. I am sorry to be so explicit, but AIDS is spread primarily through unprotected promiscuous (especially anal) sex, and the sharing of intravenous drug paraphernalia. Everyone should know how to avoid it. If not, here is an opportunity for an educational campaign.

It is true that the incidence of AIDS is somewhat lower in circumcised males, but that does not justify the pre-emptive amputation of perfectly healthy body parts without the victim's consent. The assumption (for the good of society of course) is that he may elect to engage in risky behavior later in life. Better to amputate the offending member than to take that risk. If this isn't an attack on liberty, I simply do not know what is.

In case you are one of the dwindling number of people who still believes that the foreskin is just an unhygienic flap of skin, this article should give you a much needed projectile Kool-Aid emesis. Whether you believe that the anatomy we are born with is the result of millions of years of adaptation and refinement, or intelligent design by God, the hubris of a government policy recommending a design revision without even asking its owner should offend you deeply.

Update: Some readers find this post offensive because I say that ObamaCare proponents are calling for forced circumcision. I should not have phrased it like that. What I want to say is that when government controls health care, these things have a way of becoming mandatory. Not in the initial bill, but when the program is actually implemented (by bureaucrats -- congress is long out of the picture). Doctors who do not conform to the constantly changing regulations and standards, or who do not perform the requisite number of each type of procedure will not be reimbursed at as high a level as those who do. This is not some hypothetical rant. It happens frequently. Look at the FCC, the FAA, the FDA, the EPA. I have firsthand experience with the FCC as a radio engineer. You do what they want, or you have a devil of a time come license renewal. I was always a conformant little citizen, so our renewals came through with flying colors.

Spooky Health Care Reform

Health care reform has given these words a spooky new meaning: I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Now before you go running off, thinking that I am a death panel junkie, let me explain. I do not think there is a provision in HR 3200 specifically designed to select death as an option for anyone, but unintended consequences can and do happen when government is involved. They do in the free market also, but absent oppressive government industry regulation, we are at liberty to create new solutions at will.

What I Wanted to Tell Rick Larsen

Dear Congressman Larsen,

I attended your health care town hall meeting in Mt. Vernon on Saturday. I appreciated hearing from everybody on the issue. I had prepared a statement/question which I had hoped to deliver, but time did not permit, so I will email it to you.

Most of the discussion centers on implementation details of HR 3200, with very little discussion over whether a government solution is fundamentally flawed, which I believe it is. I only want two things from congress:

1. I want congress to reverse deficit spending
2. I want congress to reverse the concentration of power in Washington D.C.

This is important if we are to preserve states' rights and individual liberty for future generations.

Especially since 2006, congress has been going in exactly the wrong direction, seizing control of private enterprise and manufacturing, Cap & Trade – and now, health care. I believe nationalizing health insurance would be a giant leap in the wrong direction.

We the People are supposed to have the liberty (and the responsibility!) to take care of ourselves, our families, and the less fortunate -- locally and voluntarily. We don’t need – or want – the federal government to take that liberty away.

There are 300 million of us, vs. 535 in Washington D.C. Given that ratio, surely We the People are more likely than government to have the ingenuity and resourcefulness to solve our own problems. I know you feel you need to help, but as the priest in the old joke says, "Please God, I'd rather do it myself".

I Attended Rick Larsen's Town Hall on Saturday

I attended Rick Larsen's Town Hall meeting on health insurance reform (HR 3200) in Mt. Vernon on Saturday. The place was packed, with standing room only, and overflow into the courtyard outside. I found a seat in the third row inside the meeting room (I arrived about two hours early). I had prepared a statement and question that I had hoped to deliver. Congressman Larsen never called on me, so I didn't get to speak up. However, several other people said what I would have said (or words to that effect).

Being inside, I didn't wave my sign, because it would block other people's view. I think there was about a 30%/70% split pro/con. There were people from all sides, and the applause lines were all over the map, but I think the ones that got the most applause and cheers (which we were asked not to do) were the ones involving less government intervention. Congressman Larsen appeared to be unbiased and open to all views, but as with Cap & Trade, I think he's just waiting until the implementation details favor his district, and then he'll vote for it. I can't fault him for wanting to favor his district, but sometimes principle should win out over favors.

We spent most of the time quibbling over implementation details, and not about whether a government solution is fundamentally flawed. Toward the end of the meeting, one man did raise that question to great applause, but little impact on the congressman. Larsen feigned agreement in principle (what else could he do?) but I don't think he was about to change his mind. At one point, the congressman went on at some length about his commitment to, and love for the Constitution, but honestly, I didn't understand what he was talking about. It was as if we were both thinking of different documents.

One poignant moment was when an 11-year old girl asked Larsen what he was going to do about deficit spending, because she didn't want to be left with the bill for our mistakes (I can't remember her exact words, but they were very challenging). I don't think he was expecting that question, and he danced around the issue, justifying the deficit and the stimulus package without addressing how we would deal with the deficit. I guess it will be our legacy to our children, just as the New Deal was our grandparents' legacy to us, and the Great Society was our parents' legacy to us. Thanks a heap.

I have to give the congressman credit, though. The meeting was scheduled for an hour, and he met with us for two and a half hours. With all the media coverage about angry mobs, he might have been apprehensive, but there was no need. There were reporters and cameras from at least one major Seattle television station. I think they were anticipating a bloodbath. None was forthcoming. We weren't an angry mob. There was some heckling and booing (from various quarters), but little or no shouting down or gross incivility within my view. I did receive email from attendees who were outside holding signs opposing the health insurance reform bill, and they said that they were heckled and intimidated. There was one bigoted redneck inside, whom I'm sure reinforced the stereotype of all conservatives as bigoted rednecks. I didn't appreciate him, even though I agreed with some of his points -- his delivery was profoundly offensive and antagonistic.

My Message to Congressman Rick Larsen

Here's what I plan to say to Rick Larsen at the health care town hall meeting tomorrow, if I get a chance:

I'm Karl Uppiano from the Bellingham Tea Party. We're not automatons programmed by the insurance companies. We've come to the same conclusion independently:

Congress must reverse deficit spending. Congress must reverse the concentration of power in Washington, D.C.

This is important because we need to preserve states’ rights, and individual liberty for future generations. If we stay on our present course, we could lose our founding principles forever.

Especially since 2006, congress has been going in exactly the wrong direction. The bail outs, taking over private enterprise and manufacturing, Cap & Trade – and now, health care – nationalizing health care would be a giant leap in the wrong direction.

We the People are supposed to have the liberty, and the responsibility, to take care of ourselves, and our families, and the less fortunate, locally and voluntarily. We don’t need – or want – the federal government to take that liberty away. We the People have the ingenuity and resourcefulness to solve our own problems.

You know, people I’ve talked to in the tea party movement don’t want to be doing this. We’d rather be at home with our families, or minding our own business. We elect representatives to uphold and defend the constitution for us. But when you do the opposite, then we feel we have to get involved.

US Soldier Questions Socialized Medicine at Town Hall Meeting

Town Hall Meetings Not Friendly to Socialized Medicine

Setting aside for the moment that the Constitution does not authorize the federal government do most of this stuff anyway, Michelle Malkin has posted videos from town hall meetings of grass roots revolts against socialized medicine.

How to Cure Health Care

If you really want to understand the problem with the health care system in the United States, and how to fix it, read and understand How to Cure Health Care by noted economist and Nobel laureate, Milton Friedman.

Private Health Insurance Will be Illegal

Setting aside for the moment that the Constitution does not authorize the federal government do most of this stuff anyway, it turns out that the health care bill (as currently written) would make private health insurance illegal, according to an editorial in Investors Business Daily. The article, entitled "It's Not an Option" spotted this provision on page 16.

I suppose it's a big thing, and the health care bill is full of big things, but I keep coming back to this: The Constitution doesn't authorize national health care. Why are people focusing on the details when the whole concept is wrong?

Congressional Budget Office Says Spending Not Sustainable

Setting aside for the moment that the Constitution does not authorize the federal government do most of this stuff anyway, the Congressional Budget Office says it isn't sustainable.

I wonder how long before congress dismantles the CBO, if it keeps telling them things that they don't want to hear.

Rick Larsen Health Care "Stories"

Rick Larsen was soliciting health care stories. I'm sure he was looking for sob stories that he could use in congress's attempt to nationalize health care. Well, I sent him my story.

Dear Congressman Larsen,

I was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2001. It was detected during a routine digital exam by my family physician. I immediately made an appointment with my urologist (which I quickly got). He did a digital exam, and ordered a biopsy, which was scheduled within a few days. The results came back within a few days.

I spent several weeks going over my options (do nothing, surgery, various forms of radiation treatment, etc.). I eventually opted for a new form of radiation treatment (seed implants). Dr. Thompson, my local radiologist in Bellingham had the procedure done on him by Dr. Blasko in at the Swedish Cancer Institute in Seattle. It was a one-day outpatient procedure, and he competed in a swimming competition the next day. That sounded pretty encouraging, so I opted for that treatment. Since I was unusually young, Dr. Thompson was uneasy about performing the procedure on me, but recommended that I speak with Dr. Blasko.

Long story short, Dr. Blasko did the procedure. He is the inventor of the procedure, and he is considered to be the best in the business. Except for some "routine complications" (my prostate swelling shut, requiring the use of a urinary catheter for a couple of weeks), I have had a full recovery, without the frequent lifelong side-effects of prostate surgery (impotence and urinary incontinence). Dr. Thompson followed me for the five years post-treatment checkups.

The entire elapsed time from detection to cure was less than six months. My out-of-pocket expenses were minimal, using insurance through my employer. I am sure Dr. Blasko is very well paid for his service and his invention, as well as all of the people at Swedish, and Dr. Thompson in Bellingham. I received cutting-edge treatment with minimal hassle, pain, inconvenience and expense.

By limiting the amount of remuneration available to practitioners in any field, government run bureaucracies tend to have a dulling effect on innovation, availability and options. I have no doubt that I would have had fewer options, and seed implants probably would not have been invented. I would have probably had surgery, with all of the added risk, down-time and possible negative side effects.

I know that private health care is not perfect in this country -- nothing ever is. But it doesn't help to throw the baby out with the bath water, either. I know, proponents of national health care say that won't happen. Well, Albert Einstein said that the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. We have seen government run health care deteriorate everywhere it's tried, including this country. "But this time it'll be different!" you say. No. It. Won't. "We have a better idea this time!" you say. No. You. Don't. Government run is government run. As soon as the government gets its talons in something, then the special interests and the exploiters line up around the block to get their meat hooks in the pie. The private health care system is already damaged largely by previous attempts by government to control the private economy, starting with wage and price controls in WWII, leading employers to offer health insurance and other benefits in lieu of higher pay. Unintended consequences have made medical insurance a necessary evil in this country, driving cost up. Medicare and medicaid also undermine the private health care system by undercutting the price structure and imposing heavy paperwork demands.

For once, I wish the government would back off, and let individual liberty, states' rights and the free market solve our problems, realizing that while imperfect, it is far more perfect than the nearest competitor, especially government.

Sincerely,
Karl Uppiano

P.S. I wrote earlier with a more generic "story". My prostate cancer treatment went so smoothly, I forgot to mention it the first time.

Update: I also sent this to senator Patty Murray, who is also soliciting sob stories.

Health Care Tea Party Event

The Tea Party movement is planning a national event to happen simultaneously next Friday.