Incomplete Financial Reform

Congress is debating a financial regulation bill. Why is Congress ignoring the gorilla in the room? Why is Congress not seeking regulation reform for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? These quasi governmental institutions were the leading cause of our current recession.

The recession started with the housing crisis which was caused by sub prime mortgage loans. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with Congress, encouraged and enabled these loans. Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 and extended by such bills as the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Security + Soundness Act of 1992 banks were required to grant risky loans to people who could not afford them. By 2001 over fifty percent of home mortgages had to meet the requirements set in these acts. It was inevitable that the housing market would collapse.

Yet most in Congress do not think Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac need to be further regulated. Some in Congress say that these institutions will be regulated at a latter date. When Congress kicks the can down the road that means they will never do it.

When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac granted outrageous bonuses to their executives, Congress ignored it. These institutions have been guaranteed endless bailouts. They are rife with incompetence and corruption. People have protested this for many years. Nothing was done.

Any financial regulation reform is meaningless, if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not included in the bill.

Signed,
The Electorate

Areas of Concern on Financial Reform

The proposed financial reform bills have four main areas that need to be addressed before there is a final vote on the bill.

A vital part of needed reform is missing from the proposed financial reform bills. Reforms for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not addressed. These two institutions played a major role in our current recession. It would be foolish in the extreme not to include them in a financial reform bill. It would be like going on a diet without addressing your caloric intake.

Wall Street is going to love the proposed liquidity fund. It provides for a permanent revolving bailout. It will encourage risky financial behavior. Risk will not frighten them, because they will not have to face the consequences of their risky behavior. This provision does not prevent bailouts – It creates them!

Some members of Congress are proposing to again separate commercial banks from investment banks. This is actually a good idea. The Glass-Steagall Act (1933) established this separation. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (1999) removed this separation and allowed banks to combine commercial, investment, and insurance services. This created banks that were recently deemed “to big to fail”.

The most alarming part of the proposed legislating is the amount of power that Congress cedes to the Executive branch. Without the approval of Congress, the administration can take over any company that IT deems to be at risk. This is not limited to banks. The Administration would control the operations of these companies. It would set policies, salaries, and the very existence of these companies. I would like to ask Congressional Democrats a question. Would you have granted these vast new powers to the Executive branch if George Bush were still President?

I ask Congress to further consider what needs to be included in a financial reform bill. Do not rush this. Our economy is at stake.

Signed,
The Electorate

Practical Health Care Reform

Cautiously members of Congress are again quietly talking about passing a health care bill. The House wishes to change the Senate bill and the Senate is considering passing the altered bill by reconciliation which would only require 51 “aye” votes. This would be a gigantic mistake. The country is against both health care proposals and would be incensed if a combined bill was passed using a parliamentary trick.

Congress needs to scrap the House and Senate bills. They are toxic. Congress needs to start over with a bi-partisan bill. There are a number of areas of agreement. There are logical steps that would truly improve health care without a governmental take-over.

1. Tort Reform is essential – real tort reform not token tort reform. A “losers pay” system would greatly reduce frivolous law suits. If doctors didn’t have the threat of these frivolous suits hanging over their heads, they would not order unnecessary tests.
2. No one should be excluded from obtaining health care insurance because of a preexisting condition.
3. Do not gut Medicare as more and more seniors enter the system. The government made a promise. It needs to keep it. However we need to actively seek to cut the fraud in both Medicare and Medicaid. Why aren’t we already doing this?
4. Citizens should be able to purchase insurance across state lines. How can Congress justify regulating health insurance under the commerce clause, if we can not purchase it across state lines? We can buy everything else nationally. We should be able to purchase the health insurance that best suits our needs.
5. We need more doctors. The federal government should offer full scholarships for primary care doctors-to-be if they will work seven years in a free clinic for a set salary.

Most in Congress would agree to these five steps. Congress needs to drop their agendas and enact common sense solutions. Do not complicate the issue. This should not be about gaining power but about doing the right thing for the country.

Signed,
The Electorate

Meaningful Tort Reform Needed

Throughout the health care debate one group has been suspiciously silent – attorneys. Of course nothing has been proposed that would restrict or harm them. Could this be because so many legislators are attorneys and wish to protect their own or is it because they donate such large amounts to political campaigns?

If Congress truly seeks to contain the rising costs of health care, tort reform MUST be addressed and it must be meaningful tort reform. Frivolous laws suits need to be eliminated and doctors must be allowed to stop practicing defensive medicine. Costs will drop if unnecessary tests are no longer ordered and malpractice insurances rates are lowered. Some have suggested a study of tort reform. This is merely a way to shelf tort reform and hope it is forgotten. We do not need a study. Some states have already enacted tort reform. That is your study. In Texas malpractice law suits have decreased by over fifty percent. Frivolous law suits no longer clutter its legal system. The cost of malpractice insurance has dropped by forty-five percent. Tort reform works. Only the lawyers don’t approve.

The American Bar Association’s lobby is powerful, but Congress must stop catering to it. The welfare of American citizen should be more important to our legislators than the interests of a select, powerful few. Even with tort reform lawyers will prosper.

Better No Reform Than Bad Reform

I really believe that we need some common sense health care reform. We need to increase competition by being able to purchase insurance across state lines. Our health insurance needs to be portable. We need to prevent exclusions because of preexisting conditions. We need true tort reform – not a study of tort reform.

This does not appear to be the type of health care reform that Congress is willing to deliver. Every proposal seems to be overly expensive and more concerned with increasing government size and power than it is with improving health care. We tell Congress we do not want a government takeover of health care. Congress does not listen. Congress wants what Congress wants and does not care what the people want.

The latest poll shows that 40% of people think the government’s top concern should be jobs. Another 25% think the top concern should be reducing the deficit and spending. Only 13% believe that health care reform should be the top governmental concern. Yet Congress is devoting most of its time to health care. Can Congress adjust its priorities to coincide with the people’s priorities?

I would rather have no health care reform than have the health care reform that is being proposed. There is an old adage. Nothing is so bad that the government can’t make it worse.

Signed,
The Electorate

Paying for Health Care Reform

After all these months no one has found a good way to pay for a large health care reform bill. We can not borrow more for we are drowning in debt. The government’s uncontrolled spending has already trashed the dollar and has increased the strain on the already sagging economy. Few want to loan this country money anyway for we are a bad risk. If we print more money, the dollar will be further devalued. The only remaining way to fund an enormous spending bill is to raise taxes.

Raising taxes during a recession will only deepen and prolong the recession. Yet the latest health care proposal is filled with taxes and fines on individuals and corporations. Corporations will pass their taxes along to consumers in higher prices. Individuals can not pass along their taxes. We can not afford any more taxes. We are hanging on by our finger tips now.

Congress plans on increasing the number of people eligible for Medicaid. States are responsible for almost fifty percent of Medicaid’s cost. The federal government then only has half the cost of new benefits included in its projected costs. Isn’t this a neat bookkeeping trick? Of course, the people are still entirely responsible for all the costs, but it sounds better. These are UNFUNDED state mandates unless you live in Nevada, Oregon, Michigan, or Rhode Island. The federal government will pay their share of the new Medicaid costs. Apparently they are special.

Congress needs to scale back their plans for health care reform. Reform the obvious. Allow us to buy insurance across state lines to increase competition. Follow the Texas example and enact real tort reform. It has lowered costs there and will lower costs elsewhere. Make it illegal to deny health care insurance because of a pre-existing condition. These three items will not affect our budget. Then provide scholarships for primary care doctors and provide premium subsidies for those who truly can not pay for insurance. These last two items will have a cost - but will not cost the trillion dollars that other plans will. Do not punish citizens with higher taxes or push this country over the financial precipice by significantly increasing the national debt.

A Practical Health Care Solution

I would like to suggest a condensed health care plan.

1. Doctors – not bureaucrats - determine appropriate treatment.

2. Don’t gut Medicare to pay for health reform.

3. No one should be excluded because of a pre-existing condition.

4. Provide full scholarships for primary care doctors.

5. Enact real tort reform – cap “pain and suffering” awards and instigate a “loser pays” policy for medical malpractice suits.

6. Allow citizens to buy health care insurance across state lines.

7. Subsidize premiums for low income families.

8. Drop the public option. It is too expensive for both the country and its citizens.

Please do not try to hide controversial items in lengthy, convoluted bills. Read the bills and make them available to the public at least five days before Congress votes on them. Be open and transparent. Respect the intelligence of your constituents.

Signed,
The Electorate

Is Health Reform Meant To Save Social Security?

I am beginning to wonder if health care reform is meant to solve the social security problem. Social security is running out of funds. How can less money be spent on social security? Every year more and more people are entering the system. If fewer people received social security, the system could be saved. If medical treatment was restricted to those who received social security, the number of recipients would be reduced.

All the health care proposals being considered cut Medicare by over 500 billion dollars. As more people enter Medicare, how can costs be massively cut and benefits not be affected? Eliminating fraud alone will not accomplish this and why has eliminating fraud not been addressed long ago? The government says it will cut waste. So what does the government consider waste? Is it denying treatment to seniors when that treatment would be approved for those who are younger? Is this waste? Some of the president’s remarks indicate that it would be.

Medicare already has arbitrary restrictions. A bone density test can not be ordered without a diagnosis of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is diagnosed by a bone density scan. It is a Catch 22. This is government bureaucracy at work.

Only half the doctors in this country currently accept Medicare. Next year, their reimbursement will be cut by twenty-one percent. Other cuts are proposed for the not so distant future. Fewer and fewer doctors will accept Medicare. Lines will get longer and in some areas cease to exist.

The current health care proposals are all a bad deal for seniors. The health care proposals are being paid for by cuts that only effect seniors. The plans are build on the backs of seniors. Plans would virtually eliminate Medicare Advantage, which supplies health care to about twenty-five percent of seniors. Many of these are low income seniors. In some sections of the country this is the only plan available. Civilizations are judged by how they treat their very young and very old. It is not about “cost effectiveness”. It’s about valuing human life.

Signed,
The Electorate

Health Care Part 2: Congress Still Doesn't Listen

This summer the American people made it abundantly clear that they did not like and did not want the health care reform being proposed by Congress. Polls show that this is still true. Two-thirds of our representatives were unwilling to meet with their constituents. I can at least respect those who were willing to “take the heat”. I have waited to see the response of our representatives. At first they ”hunkered down”, but are now again beginning to try and push this unwanted, so called, reform down our throats.

The House is trying to “repackage” and combine their proposals. The bills don’t need to be repackaged; they need to be fundamentally changed. A bad bill is a bad bill. The House needs to consider what the people want and not just what Congress thinks they need.

The Senate is working on a supposedly bipartisan bill. If the government controls a co-op, it is still a public option. The bill is now being marked up in committee. It is being changed from a true effort of bipartisan legislation into the same kind of legislation that the public has already said that they do not want.

Is Congress unable or unwilling to listen to the American people? We do not want the government to run or control our health care. It doesn’t matter what Congress calls the plan. We do not want and can not afford a large, expensive new program. Congress has already spent all the money this country has and more. In this difficult time, citizens can not afford more taxes and fines are nothing but hidden taxes.

Significant changes can be made to our health care system that will make it more available and more affordable. These changes will not further bankrupt this country and will not cause more governmental intrusion in out lives. Congress needs to drop the public option. Congress needs to eliminate exclusions for pre-existing conditions. Congress needs to allow citizens to buy health care from any insurance company based in this country – across state lines. This would increase competition and lower costs. Congress needs to enact real tort reform. Cap “pain and suffering” awards and instigate a “loser pays” system for medical malpractice suits. This would discourage the practice of defensive medicine and lower malpractice insurance. This would lower health care costs. This has already been proven at the state level. Congress does need to address the fraud and waste in current government health care programs. Congress should not gut Medicare to provide health care to others. Congress can set a basic minimum of health care coverage, but not a maximum. Congress should eliminate comparative cost effectiveness in health care. People are not lab rats. These are just a few things that could be done to reform health care and would not put our country further in debt.

Signed,
The Electorate

Health Care: Spending

This country can’t afford a large government run health care plan. Claiming “we can’t afford not to” is not a logic or legitimate excuse. Congress has already spent all the money we have and more. Congress spent 787 billions dollars on a stimulus bill that didn’t stimulate. Congress passed a 410 spending bill with nearly 9,000 earmarks. Congress expanded SChip to families that earn over $80,000. The government is spending money they do not have on things we do not want or need. There is nothing left to spend. No one wants to loan us more money. If we continue to print money, that is not backed, we risk runaway inflation. No government or family can continue to spend money they do not have. Your bank account is empty. Stop writing checks.

The majority of Americans do not want a government run, government controlled health care plan anyway. Congress needs to pass health care reform that Americans actually want. We want health care that we control. We want tort reform to help lower costs. We need to eliminate needless tests and frivolous law suits. We want a wide assortment of plans, which can also be purchased across state lines; so, that we can select the plan that is best for us. We want no person to be excluded because of a pre-existing condition. We are willing to subsidize premiums f or those who “truly” need it. We want more doctors and nurses. The government could provide scholarships to those seeking to enter these fields. In return these new doctors and nurses could agree to work in clinics for a set number of years. Congress needs to pursue solutions that will actually work instead of a utopia they think they can create.

Signed,
The Electorate

The Voice of America

In town halls and in other forums the American people are voicing their opposition to the current health care proposals. Rahm Emanuel, the White House Chief of Staff, says that this is just noise - that it doesn't matter. He is saying that the opinions of Americans are not important. This is foolish in the extreme. Congress and the President serve at our pleasure. They are responsible to us, the American people. We do not want a government take over of our health care system.

The federal government has become more and more intrusive. It is far exceeding the authorities granted to it in the Constitution. You might consider reading or rereading this document. It is beautiful in its clarity and simplicity. You might also consider reading the health care bills. They are not clear and concise. They are deliberately written obtusely. This is done to discourage reading them.

We all want health care reform, but not this reform. We want the cost of health care lowered by enacting tort reform and addressing the rampant fraud in the system. Pre-existing conditions should not exclude anyone from health care insurance. We want health care to be made available to those who want it - within the private sector.

We ask you to listen to the voice of the American people. Some politicians, in their grandiosity, say if people just understood the bills they would support them. The American people are more intelligent than these politicians think. We do not want the government to control our health care. We are watching and we will remember and vote accordingly.

Signed,
The Electorate

Health Care Reform We Want

We have the best health care system in the world. Could it be made better? Of course, it could. Let’s improve it – not throw it away. We do not need a completely new system. We just need to correct its current problems. Here are things that should be addressed in health care reform.

1. We do not want government run, government controlled health care. The government should not be involved in our medical decisions. These are decisions we should make with the advice of our doctors. Any new plans should be private sector plans.

2. A variety of plans, in the private sector, should be available. Individuals have different needs and should be able to select the plan that best fits them. One size does not fit all in medicine.

3. Pre-existing conditions should not exclude anyone from health care.

4. Small businesses should be able to pool together – like IGA grocers do – so that more affordable health care plans are available to them.

5. One-third of those currently uninsured can afford health care. Some have declined plans available to them at work. They are gambling that they will not need health care insurance. If they do not choose to enroll in a health care plan, they should be required to post a bond=2 0for medical expenses that they can not pay for out-of-pocket.

6. One-third of the uninsured is eligible for Medicaid. Enroll them.

7. Twenty percent of the uninsured are not legally in this country. They should only receive emergency care. They should not be given health care coverage.

8. This would leave less than ten million citizens that need health care. The private sector could offer coverage to this group. The government could supplement premiums, as financially needed. Financial aid should not be given to anyone whose income exceeds the national average income.

9. Health care reform is meaningless if we do not have tort reform. This will lower health care costs. Unnecessary tests are now ordered because doctors are forced to practice defensive medicine. Frivolous law suits would be greatly reduced if the plaintiff, in unsuccessful cases, is required to pay court costs and the legal costs of both parties. Malpractice premiums would be reduced, which in turn would lower health care costs.

10. Fraud is rampant in Medicare and Medicaid. The government needs to better regulate its health care plans. Fraud in the private sector is much lower.

11. Senior coverage is shrinking. It is now being reduced by ten percent, as more and more baby boomers enter the system. Other cuts are being considered. Age will be a determining factor in deciding what treatment – if any – may be used. Old people are becoming disposable.

12. This country needs catastrophic health care coverage. Over half those who are forced into bankruptcy because of medical costs have health care coverage.

These reforms would improve our health care system instead of throwing it on the trash heap. The vast majority of people like their health care plans. We ask Congress to improve our health care plans – not to destroy them. We do not want a government take-over of our health care.

Signed,
The Electorate

Health Care: Reform We Actually Need

While I am against a government run health care option, this country does need health reform. There are issues that actually need to be addressed. Costs need to be curtailed and health care needs to be made more available.

Many doctors have already computerized health records. It is logical; can prevent mistakes; and makes it more efficient and less costly to file claims. Fraud must be addressed. Every year billions of health care dollars are wasted on fraudulent claims. Tort reform is needed. Frivolous law suits could be reduced by requiring plaintiffs to pay court costs and attorneys fees in unsuccessful cases. Contingency attorneys' fees should be limited to a reasonable set percentage of the award. If frivolous law suits were reduced, medical costs would be reduced and there would be fewer unnecessary tests order. CYA medicine is wasteful medicine.

Health care does need to be made available to all legal citizens. No one should be excluded because of a preexisting condition. About 16% of our population does not currently have health care insurance. One-third of the uninsured could afford insurance, but choose not to do so. One-third of the uninsured are eligible for Medicaid, but for some reason they have not applied. At least 20% of the uninsured are not in this country legally. They should only receive emergency care, not health care insurance. The uninsured who are not in these groups could receive health care insurance from private plans in which premiums are subsidized by the government according to need. If this were done every American would have access to health care that THEY controlled.

The government should not be involved in our medical decisions. It should not be involved in decisions that may effect whether we live or we die.

Signed,
The Electorate

Health Care Plans Under Consideration

One of the health care plans being considered proposes a fine of $750 per person for businesses that do not provide health care. Does Congress really think this would encourage more businesses to offer health care?

Currently it costs companies over $10,000 per employee to provide health care for employees. It would be more cost effective for these companies to pay the fine than it would be to provide health care. This proposed provision would actually result in companies dropping their work provided health care coverage. Perhaps this is the true purpose of this provision. People would loose their work health care plans and be forced into the government run plan that Congress seems to want. People would be forced into an inferior plan with fewer options and rationing.

NO GOVERNMENT RUN health care option should be in any Health Care Reform Bill.

Signed,
The Electorate

Government Run Health Care

To Congress,

The ABC special didn't address the problems of a government run, government subsidized health care plan. I would like to address why this type of plan is a very bad deal for the American public.

1/ It is too expensive. Private plans could cover the uninsured at a much lower cost.

2/ A government run, government subsidized plan would force private plans out of business - leaving us with only the government plan. Private plans can not compete with a tax subsidized plan.

3/ The government would decide what treatment, if any, would be allowed. The government should not control our life and death medical decisions.

4/ A government plan must result in rationing. We have a limited number of doctors. Each doctor must treat more and more patients. There will be long waits to see doctors and others just won't be seen.

5/ Doctors will be driven from the medical field or students will decide on other careers. Medicare now only pays a percentage ( 81% ) of doctors fees. More cuts are already being proposed and malpractice insurance costs are not being addressed with tort reform. Doctors will not be able to afford to be doctors.

6/ The government run plan will result in inferior medical care, because of overburdened doctors, limited treatment, and long waits.

These are a few of the reasons the American public does not want a government run plan. We have all dealt with government bureaucracies and their inefficiencies. We do not want our medical decisions to go down this road. There is an old joke. If you think your HMO is bad, just wait until the government gets involved. Don't get the government involved!

Signed,
The Electorate