Health Care Reform – A National Scam

April 25, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The revelations on the Health care legislation published via articles ‘Health Care Legislation Amendment,’ dated April 22, 2010 and ‘Health Care Reform – Facts and Flaws,’ April 23, 2010, based on the facts is a serious national crisis that cannot be slighted for political or personal ideology.

Legislation that is designed to favor the industry with dire consequences for the citizens, desperately relying on immediate relief from the abominable insurance and health care industry abuse have been defrauded under the guise of reform.

A thorough analysis of health care components on this website along with contributions from neutral economic experts, Medicare Office of the Actuary, Congressional Budget Office, Department of Health and Human Services unequivocally confirm the legislations’ serious implications on millions of lives and the national deficit at $35 trillion from 2010 to 2019.

The health care law in 2014, with mandatory insurance purchase from the private for profit health insurance industry, targets the struggling average Americans and the corporations with penalties for failing to enroll in the system.

However, the requirement on the insurance industry to accept patients with pre-existing illnesses has no similar conditions.

The cost-benefit determination for the decade – 2010-2019 and beyond is disproportionately alarming due to the essential national health care service exclusively privatized and exacerbated with compulsory insurance on federal funding via tax credits to middle and low-income families.

Federal funding to the economically disadvantaged population is necessary.

Unfortunately, the funding is also the means to facilitate private insurance purchase at the industry’s discretionary price conveniently subject to market rates and the costs burden related to health plan taxes, fees etc., factored in as the government’s revenue ultimately transferred back to the federal source through aid recipients and taxpayers.

The report found that “the overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010 – 2019, or nine-tenths of 1 percent.

To put that in perspective, total health care spending during the decade is estimated to surpass $35 trillion.”

In other aspects, the Medicare cuts are lethal to the seniors gravely concerned about the health care law with the following review:

“The longer-term viability of the Medicare reductions is doubtful.

Assessment flagged the Medicare cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and other providers as potentially unsustainable.

Further, it projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular program.

Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent, as the plans reduce extra benefits that they currently offer.”

Instead of providing the Universal Medicare with 24/7 access across the nation, the so-called reform is geared in the reverse direction and clearly aimed at weakening Medicare system that is appreciated by the beneficiaries and the legislators on both sides of the aisle.

Again, the Universal Medicare – Single Payer system is affordable and the only permanent solution to the burgeoning health care crisis and national spending.

The expenditure to exceed $35trillion through private for profit health care leaving millions penalized for possible default on insurance subscription and the 34 million Americans expected to wait until 2020 for coverage is not a reform.

It is a direct assault on the vulnerable and ailing population,

For whom the legislation was initiated.

Those who pretend to be tone deaf reflect callousness on this issue for they think it would not affect them.

Apart from narcissism, the attitude is a potential threat to democracy.

As for some advocating to ignore the call, it reveals their priority in promoting self-interest through cronyism, the catalyst to the broken political system that replaces national interest with special interest needs.

The ramifications on silence in the national issue inevitably impact every citizen regardless of political allegiance.

Even the A-political consumers and taxpayers are not spared in the massive health care scam.

Complicity in the widely acknowledged defective national health care legislation is a dangerous setback for democracy.

Anyone who considers this issue to be isolated ought to be in a parallel universe, for it’s the tip of the iceberg with more legislations of this kind – whether financial, energy, climate bills…replicating the pattern.

Despite the grim facts endangering life and the dismal national deficit forecasts,

The White House response to move ahead on other issues for political expediency is deeply regrettable and demonstrates the lack of respect for the citizens’ well being in the national health care law.

Congress is the republic’s true representatives and,

I extend my support to the lawmakers willing to come forward to amend the health care legislation to conform to the reality and that being:

Universal Medicare for all citizens with 24/7 access – Single Payer System and,

It would be funded within the allocated revenue sources to contain the phenomenal health care spending.

I’m prepared to work with them from the public domain to protect the citizens’ interest.

I guarantee every lawmaker that this unique step on their part would be highly rewarding for them in the midterm elections, seemingly challenging around that time.

If the legislations were proved detrimental to the citizens’ welfare and progress as established in the national health care law and there is reluctance to amend the bill,

Then such act is unconstitutional and regarded as treason.

Health care is a life and death matter.

Existing Medicare expansion for all is the only effective policy to deal with the national coverage and escalating deficit.

Legislators and the Executive branch opposed to this amendment owe legitimate explanation to the American electorate in public.

I hope the lawmakers will be guided by their constitutional oath to serve the nation and safeguard the public interest by amending the bill to “Universal Medicare,” commencing immediately, not in a future date.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

The Senate Health Care Bill – Defrauding Democracy

December 16, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The Senate is moving forward to wrap up the ‘historic legislation’ as a Christmas gift to their campaign financiers, the insurance industry. Although, the sound bites deceptively imply the magnanimous favor to the American public, the hostage in the ‘so-called’ health care reform, the reality is examine worthy.

The fact of the matter is the bill cannot be any more hostile to the American people as the taxpayers, the consumers and the electorate in a democracy. It targets the employers i.e. the small businesses, medium and large corporations, the dwindling middle-class and the struggling working class forced to buy private insurance with penalty imposition on the employers and individuals along with the Medicare expansion denial to senior citizens between the age group 55-64.

There is a bizarre component suggesting that it’s not compulsory for the large corporations to cover their employees. Nevertheless, the government assistance sought by the insurance companies to levy charges against the potential offenders. Similarly eligible workers provided with federal subsidies to buy private coverage. Ironically, the government intervention at this level is appreciated by the industry and their Senate representatives but prevented from selling the government run insurance program.

Should the women be spared in this category? Apparently not and concessions seemingly made to appease the Nebraska Democrat Senator Ben Nelson seeking maximum restrictions on abortion coverage in the renewed insurance market the legislation intend to set up. In addition, the Senator’s care for the industry extended to exempt them from the anti-trust laws.

The White House cheered the version and responded accordingly.

“Congressional allies were “on the precipice” of a historic accomplishment.

It is deficit-neutral. It bends the cost curve. It covers 30 million Americans who don’t have health insurance, and it has extraordinary insurance reforms in there to make sure that we’re preventing abuse.”

Let’s dissect the bill in the appropriate context.

Deficit neutral – The earlier Procedural Vote Bill appeared to be neutral. However, the current version with numerous industry-biased amendments is awaiting the congressional budget office confirmation on the cost neutrality.

Bends the cost curve – Yet to realize and once again falls back on the CBO determination.

Covers 30 million Americans – Reports from reliable sources affirm 10 millions. Despite owing the benefit of the doubt to the claim, the arbitrary 30 million are mandatorily required to purchase the private insurance in the absence of government run insurance program – the public option.

It’s beyond reasonable doubt that the offer would be initially made available at a teaser rate mimicking the notorious sub-prime mortgage pattern from the Wall Street counterpart, the financial institutions and then later on, the consumers hit with an extraordinary hike as captives in the system, a kind of defibrillator treatment to reset the industry into the exorbitant profit mode.

Insurance reforms preventing abuse – Alas, there is bipartisanship in this respect to include those with ‘pre-existing’ conditions otherwise excluded in the existing protocol. Even then the agreement reached after assurance that the benefactors, none other than the insurance companies absolutely gain from the inevitable customized premiums for the substrata with the anti-trust law exemption tied to the legislation.

Simply the bill is a mockery of the victims’ plight and clearly demonstrated in the kingmakers’ unabashed flattery of the insurance giants for their guarantee to promote the individual lawmakers aka lawbreakers’ political career. Never mind the bitter truth about 45,000 people dying due to the unaffordable and inadequate health care predominantly from the lack of universal system such as single payer adapted by most developed nations around the world.

With respect to funding the bill, it’s extracted from the projected Medicare spending cuts to a tune of $460 billion to health care providers, which translates into forcing patients to accept subsidized service. Alternatively, the seniors end up paying more for better if not quality care. Other derivatives are the Cadillac plan tax revenues including the payroll tax on individuals exceeding the $250,000 threshold.

Essentially, the carefully contrived bill primarily focuses on the insurance industry’s financial interest while ensuring the legislators’ political security at the expense of the vast majority. Thus clarifying the solemn union between Washington and Wall Street as inseparable soul mates.

Whereas for the main street the deal qualifies as the ‘historic scam’ rather than the ‘historic reform.’ Unfortunately, in the contemporary politics priorities are based on the personal justification failing to serve the greater good for all. Aiming to pass a dysfunctional legislation to fulfill a formality is an explicit assault on the intelligence of the millions of Americans who shared their heart wrenching experiences since the debate onset.

The truly meaningful health care reform is the single payer system that not only simplifies the process but also replaces the more than two thousand-page dossier admittedly ignored by the opposition with the remaining members merely glancing at the relevant information in the bill.

Besides, the single payer program comprehensively satisfies the needs in every aspect through the cost effective yet efficient superior care for all Americans irrespective of the socio economic barriers.

Therefore, it’s incumbent on Congress to heed to public plea and honor the democratic will in the health care legislation by transforming the house bill to a single payer format through reconciliation process as a warning that democracy can no longer be undermined by the cohort representing the Wall Street and Washington.

U.S. democracy is increasingly revealed vulnerable to undemocratic elements dominating the political, economic and social domain. It’s a ‘nuclear’ status for the modern democracy.

Hence, Congress must move forward to limit the Senate vote requirement to 51 from the prevailing 60 to eliminate the filibuster currently misused as a threat by the opportunist legislators defaulting on their constitutional duty towards their constituents and the nation.

Evidently, the Senate bill is a cosmetic presentation with the substance designed to exacerbate the American people trials and tribulations, meanwhile contributing to the insurance industry’s further prosperity aided by the narcissistic culture in Washington.

American people should rise and protest against the biggest charade in the form of Senate legislation authored by the insurance industry and demand Congress to approve the single payer system by jamming the communication channels via telephones, text message, emails, social networking sites, blogs etc., Remember, democracy is alive when you remain alert and active in the legislative process.

The powerful is powerless without the political capital accessible only through populace vote.

In conclusion, the American citizens should peacefully dissent the carte blanche to Wall Street and Washington and release America from the reform resistant political sycophants.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Senate Preliminary Victory on Procedural Vote

November 21, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Congratulations! To the American public, President Barack Obama, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and the Senators casting their votes to enable the health care debate for Senate approval.

It’s encouraging to witness the commitment from the majority to improve millions of American lives.
The action was long overdue and it’s just beginning to take fruition. I have no doubt that upon the historic national health care legislation; the American electorate would reciprocate in the 2010 mid-term elections with the appropriate results.

It’s important to maintain the momentum without substantial compromise on the real benefits and rights of the American people. Again, the bill should encompass robust ‘public option’ component and other factors relevant to the women’s reproductive rights, preserving existing Medicare to senior citizens while accommodating reasonable payments to providers in the government run program . The federal deficit reduction or neutrality is equally essential in the final bill.

An extraordinary journey, nevertheless the light is visible at the end of the tunnel.

As stated earlier, I remain steadfast with my support to President Barack Obama and every member in the House and Senate in passing the necessary legislations on various national and international issues.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

A Candid Disclosure

November 8, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Last night the health care legislation passed by the House of Congress is a major step towards recognizing the American people’s plight in the most stressful economic times. The House members confirmed that their consolidated efforts and commitment to the American electorate could produce the desirable results in the economic, social and environmental cause.

Health care is relevant to all and no longer an individual matter.

I had recently fallen ill from women’s related health issue in the months of September and October 2009. Accordingly, I was scheduled for a major surgery on November 4, 2009 – ironically on the anniversary of the historic Presidential election date and around the special elections.

In order to deal with the health crisis, I had to suspend some activities and focus on the immediate recovery plan. It was a temporary action and not meant to avoid communication at any level. Now, I’m able to resume direct contact with the responsible authorities.

Even though, the surgery was finalized and the consent forms were handed out for signing three days prior to the operation, I experienced a sudden change with the symptoms disappearing and felt a sense of well being without any medical intervention. Therefore, I had no reason to proceed with the surgery and it was cancelled the day before the scheduled date.

I attribute the positive outcome to spirituality and enormously grateful for the grace and compassion from the ‘Almighty God.’

During my illness, I frequently thought about the people diagnosed for a medical condition but unable to undergo treatment due to the lack of affordable insurance and hence deprived of medical care. Needless to say, there are many infants, children, young adults and others who require medical attention and the families are left with hard choices in saving the lives of their loves ones.

In my case, the medical insurance is mainly used for the routine check-ups as a preventive care with the exception of a foot surgery three years ago. Despite the underutilization, the insurance company – Blue Cross Blue Shield wanted to conduct an interview with me regarding the procedure. Perhaps, the aim was to rule out the pre-existing scenario. Again, the insurance company having profited from my good health all these years had a pre-screening protocol that did not take place because the surgery was cancelled.

The Senators against public option in the health care bill owe a legitimate explanation to the millions of Americans forced to postpone decisions on life and death matter in the absence of effective competition through federal run health care against the profit oriented insurance industry.

I emphasize that health care is not a privilege but a necessity for survival. If the richest nation on earth fails to provide a decent health care plan to citizens, the achievements in other areas are meaningless with the public health in jeopardy.

I sincerely hope that the United States Senate will coordinate with the recently passed House bill without compromising the core element i.e. the federal managed health insurance program at a minimum to help the thousands of ailing Americans rightfully seeking the public option in the embattled health care reform.

As for as my health is concerned, I’m feeling fine and remain steadfast in my support to the legislative affairs and foreign policies benefiting the people of the United States and the rest of the world.

I stand by President Barack Obama and the Congress in serving the nation and humanity through legislations and strategies comprising economic growth, social justice and political fairness at home and overseas.

In compliance with the highest commandment, the purpose of my political involvement is to assist the leaderships in the United States and around the world to establish peace, progress and prosperity for all human beings besides protecting the environment.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Health Care Resolution – Clarification

August 17, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Ever since the health care debate started, the main objective among the visible opponents has been to fictionalize the various contents of the bill. The health care bill principles – costs, quality and affordability extensively discussed per blogpost ‘Health Care Reform’ July 11, 2009 on this website.

Several testimonials by citizens from all walks of life through various mediums confirmed the urgency for health care reform. The partisan politics continues to disparage the millions of people deprived of proper health care during the public discourse.

A sensitive national matter turned into a controversial subject by the special interests’ agents. The health care bill described as voluminous, inadequate and far-fetched in reference to the government plan or public option. On the other hand, the noise amazingly disappeared with the White House statement on the possible elimination of the government plan from the competition.

Hence, the overview of the health care funding and the actual role of government plan in the health care legislation vital for true perspective.

How is the government health care funded?

The health care funded through three main categories –

First, by reducing wasteful spending and redundant costs prevalent in the ‘all private run’ system at the moment, a liability transferred on to the Corporations providing insurance, small businesses and individual insurance subscribers by the Health Insurance industry.

Trimmings guaranteed to generate the required savings to a tune of $300-$450 billion, the major portion of it stemming from out-of-court settlements in health care lawsuits, rising costs in malpractice insurance, neglecting preventive care, excessive intervention by the insurance companies with pre-authorization and final authorizations…contributing to a chaotic structure of the huge public system.

Next, streamlining the Health Care industry’s disproportionate costs across the wide spectrum of health care services to fund the program. It’s essential to emphasize that no one is against profit in either private run or hybrid systems. However, profit set to bankrupt the economy and the consumers in the form of businesses and individuals is equivalent to driving blindfolded on a one-way street with a dead end.

Unless and until the health care industry profit margin is reasonable, even the Health Insurance industry objectionable to the government involvement cannot sustain the escalating costs factored with exorbitant mark-ups by the health care complex.

The common problem for both private health insurance and the government plan is the costs incurred in the health care provision – health care professional fees, hospital admissions, treatment, drugs and ancillary services.

In order to keep up with the ever increasing health care industry costs, the health insurance competes with the counterpart by selling unaffordable insurance resulting in the estimated fifty million uninsured as well as cutting corners by denying adequate and quality coverage to the remaining dissatisfied insured population. Even though, the propaganda negates the fact claiming the satisfied insured population at 80%.

The health care and health insurance might appear to be in cohort when they really are at odds against each other in the excessive profit oriented scheme. There has been a rebuttal on this ‘profit’ issue by the health care spokespersons, some even resorting to name-callings as the line of defense.

An elaborate explanation was provided via Op-ed, Washington Post, July 2009-

How the reigning in on profit in a free market system would drive the economy to pitfalls.

What was not included in the explanation is the attempt to derive limitless profit at the expense of a vast majority in a sector that would naturally enable the expected returns given the volume based health industry. Similar to the energy sector surviving and thriving in any economy.

Another example for that matter, the world’s manufacturing warehouse, China ending in trade surplus with the rock bottom price due to worldwide mass production.

Regardless of the government plan, the health insurance industry cannot keep its promise to the changes required in the system without the cooperation from the health care industry. In a way, the government plan would ease the burden on the health insurance industry by negotiating with the health care industry via legislation. So, instead of viewing the government or the public option as an obstacle, the health insurance should envisage positive outcome from the hybrid system.

Third, tax increases on the taxpayers with extraordinary income configured in the earlier bill by the House of Congress to supplement health care funding is the prudent path to economic recovery that is excoriating the national revenue from other sectors. It could very well be a short-term pain evolving into long-term healing process.

The emotional outbursts with claims “I want to take my America back from Obama” revolves around the fear and commotion created by the veterans of smear tactics and the infamous ‘swift boat’ campaigners emerging during national elections, illegal wars and all things against national progress.

Ironically, the skepticism and cynicism about public option or a robust government plan for the benefit of the national economy and health in the near future overshadow the crisis in the present health care system.

One might call it a potent weapon by the opponents of the national interests suppressing the anomalies of the exclusive private run enterprise that is proven catastrophic to the overall economy and the general population.

Thus far, in all the town hall meetings organized to address the ‘legitimate’ concerns and queries from the victims of the present health care conglomerate watered down with the negatively charged combative remarks, cleverly pushing the pro-reform legislators on the defense.

Did the opponents gain from the anti-national movement?

Maybe for the time being but only soon to realize that such back alley ambush has its own ramifications that should not be underestimated.

As stated earlier, it’s about time the medical industrial complex and their representatives in the Senate and the House against the public option or the government plan get off the offense and provide believable answers to the simple yet direct questions:

The contentious issue in the health care legislation is the government plan or the public option.

Considering that, the contemporary health care system is exclusively private run with the exception of Medicare and Medicaid,

1. Why is the nation left behind with a staggering fifty million population uninsured, if the free market has enough competitors to lower the price?

The correct response: It’s because there is no real or a formidable challenger up to the task of dealing with the monopoly in the system and the non-profit cooperatives will be a fly that would be swatted down by the big players even before it begins to buzz around.

2. Why are the insured population forced to reach out to overseas health care facilities, under the apparently fabulous health care system certified by the ‘special interests rewarded’ representatives in the Senate and the House?

Quote – Wall Street Journal – Extensive 2008 editorial and articles – “South Asia, a popular destination for American patients awaiting transplants and various treatment care involving hospitalizations.”

Response: Health care industry’s phenomenal profit driven costs is triggering the health insurance industry to subsidize quality and appropriate treatment necessary but flatly denied to the ailing population. Further, the pre-authorization and final authorization protocols from the private health insurers applicable on healthy and pre-disposed health patients arising from the lack of trust by the insurance industry against the health care industry cause the exodus of the suffering population to foreign locations, not to mention the loss of income to the state and the national economy.

3. Why is the infant mortality and uninsured dependents in the lower income families, elderly care in terms of drug costs to name a few issues, so high under the ‘supposedly’ caring and affordable health care system?

Response: The health insurance and the health care industry policy designed for the healthy and the wealthy minority, rather than the underprivileged and the unfortunate majority.

4. The assertion that government plan dependent upon costs reduction from the health care industry only to be evaded by the health care providers held against the public option entry.

On similar assumption, What is the insurance industry proposal to alleviate the costs to make it affordable for all Americans?

Is the health insurance industry more influential over the health care providers?

In that case, what are they waiting for and why can’t they demonstrate their ability to improve the conditions now, i.e. (if they recognize that there is a systemic problem) to include all in the present system that would benefit the stagnant economy as well.

Alternatively, Does the health insurance possess a unique charm that would mesmerize the health care proponents to agree with the Insurance Industry demands?

One would assume that if it works for one, why it shouldn’t work for another.

Response: Both health care and health insurance industry common goal is to appease their shareholders with handsome returns and will stretch any limits with the consumer as the sacrificial lamb in the expansive, unmitigated health care arena.

5. The Congressmen and Women not in favor of public option, but probably supportive of non-profit cooperative system, is obligatory to their constituents and the entire nation to come forward in a town hall meeting or comparable setting,

To lay out their presumably efficient ‘free market’ operation predicted to create a utopian environment apart from setting precedence for other industrialized nations with hybrid health care systems.

Considering the unanimous consensus that the health care system due for modifications,

It would be fair and justified to call on the health care, the health insurance industry and their representatives in Congress responsible for the stalemate to present the facts and figures to the American consumers and taxpayers in their pledge to clean up the mess in the national health care.

In this context, the activism from the health care professionals seemingly frustrated with the insurance industry dictating terms and conditions in patient care disappointingly missing in action.

The other issue raised by the industry and their agents is – Why is the health care reform a priority and what is the need to rush on the issue?

Response: The economy and the plight of the suffering population speak volume in this regard. Failure to resuscitate the ailing heart would lead to fatality, evidenced in the victims’ real experiences.

In a nutshell, the nation has had enough with the shenanigans from the opponents of the national health care reform who have neither any treatment nor cure to the national epidemic called the health care that is aptly the health nightmare for the sane majority.

To reiterate, Health care is not a privilege or an entitlement but a necessity for survival.

Therefore, targeting higher profit against the market reality directly affecting the economy is not a smart business strategy, besides being beyond the realm of ethics and economics.

The proof of the pudding is in the status quo.

If the industries and their agents cannot resolve the matter effectively through cooperation, the obstinacy reflects the national decimation policy.

Finally, Health care reform is meaningless without government plan or public option.

Thank you.
Padmini Arhant

Verdict on the Health Care Legislation

July 30, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The health care legislation vigorously contested by the opponents of the economic recovery and the unemployment deterrence. Sometimes, it’s easier to deal with the ‘devil’ you know than the ‘devil’ you don’t. The existing health care crisis contributed by the health care and insurance conglomerate’s profit raking strategy fits in with the metaphor.

When the people strive to make it to the top of the slippery slope titled the sensible health care legislation their harnesses are either tampered with or forcibly pulled off by the groups posing as the ‘rescue guards,’ i.e. the representatives in the House and the Senate obligatory to their financiers – the special interests.

In the interim, the ‘so-called’ bipartisanship in the Senate with some prominent legislators and selective House members from both sides of the aisles holding substantial investments in the health care stocks are focused on safeguarding their investments with assurances to the health industry – ‘your wish shall be my command.’

The House and the Senate version presented thus far is directly contradictory to the populist requirement and the President’s initial plan. The shameful tactic in the twentieth century – apart from paralyzing the health care reform, it’s also instrumental for the status quo and they are indicated in the article below.

Deal with ‘Blue Dogs’ sets up health care vote

Associated Press – 07/29/09

“The House changes, which drew immediate opposition from liberals in the chamber, would reduce the federal subsidies designed to help lower-income families afford insurance, exempt additional businesses from a requirement to offer insurance to their workers and change the terms of a government insurance option.

More problematic from the Democrats’ point of view is a tentative agreement to omit a provision in which the government would sell insurance in competition with private industry. In its place, the group is expected to recommend non-profit cooperatives that could operate at the state, regional or even national level.

Nor is any bipartisan recommendation likely to include a requirement for large businesses to offer insurance to their workers. Instead, they would have a choice between offering coverage or paying a portion of any government subsidy that non-insured employees would receive.”

What is wrong with the classic ‘pro-industry’ proposal to appease the health care enterprise at every insured and uninsured American taxpayer’s peril?

Firstly, the House bill to reduce the federal subsidies designed to help lower-income families afford insurance, instead of demanding the health care system comprising the AMA, health care providers accepting Medicare and Medicaid, Pharmaceuticals, the hospital industry…and the insurance industry mark-down the preposterous profit margins hidden in the superficially inflated costs driving the economy and every citizen to bankruptcy.

If there is any resistance from the groups in this regard, then taxing the expensive insurance coverage ensuring the tax liability on the industry rather than the end-consumer is absolutely necessary. If it was already agreed to by all negotiators then the measure combined with higher taxes on capital expenditures by the industry should adequately cover the increase in federal subsidies to the economically disadvantaged.

The health industry in their defense might argue that the supply and demand market forces drive the costs in a free market system. In this context, the commonly unknown fact being, the health industry unlike other industries are uniquely advantaged to thrive throughout with excessive demand arising from the myriad of sources causing illnesses to a vast population of which an alarming proportion fall in the >‘unhealthy’ category.

In the absence of robust competition from a government provided affordable health care, the industry giants have the expansive field wide open to themselves with a huge demand as the catalyst for the exorbitant profits in products and services.

In addition, the major market-share by the big players lay overcast of monopoly for others to compete effectively with the price factor, notwithstanding the industry protocol on limited choice and coverage of care at disproportionate costs.

The non-profit cooperatives have been recently involved in financial mismanagement as reported in California and severely lack in efficiency, ultimately benefiting the current private care system by default. Therefore, it’s not surprising for the industry groups to lobby for the non-profit cooperatives against the government run program.

The bill doesn’t end there. Ice cream is more delicious when served with toppings.

With respect to the businesses and large corporations exempt from the insurance coverage requirement to their workers and employees, it’s yet another ‘dessert’ moment for the legislators playing gracious hosts to the corporate musketeers.

Obviously, the lawmakers more appropriately the lawbreakers are falling head over heels in their romance with the corporate sponsors by relieving them from the fundamental responsibility to care for their workers and employees with health insurance while leaving the underemployed American workforce to fend for themselves in the profit manifested exclusive private health club.

As for the Blue Dogs, a misnomer to the species iconic for their unflinching loyalty, unequivocally clarify that ‘conservatism’ motto regardless of political factions is to delay, defeat and derail national progress. Clearly, the democratic electorate will be able to overcome the obstacle by replacing the obstructionists with the supportive ones in the 2010 elections.

To summarize, the health care casserole prepared by the House and the Senate in the Congress is palatable to the industry as the primary patrons and the caterer of the special menu. The remaining large starving population having peeked at the menu items forced to fake satisfaction from the aroma of the dish, although meant for the populist but served to win over the mighty health care industrialists.

Seriously, if this health care legislation meant to be a ‘reform’, then the bill must include the public option plan, increased federal subsidies, free health care for the most impoverished and a nondiscretionary business/Corporate health insurance for all workers and employees.

Failing that, it would be a band-aid treatment for a widespread chronic ailment in the industry gorging profits at every opportunity and the ‘so-called’ solution will be a cyclical nightmare for the nation attempting its way out of the quick sand economy.

The proposal funded through compromise from the industry with costs reduction equalizing profit contraction proportionate to market sustainability and tax increases suggested in the earlier House Bill itemized per extraordinary income category is the ideal gateway to true ‘reform.’

Otherwise, under the present deal the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ not found in Iraq would appropriately apply to the millions dependent on the democratic majority controlling all three branches of the government to do the right by the people.

Because the welfare of the people is paramount for the success of corporations in a capitalist or any other economic systems as people are the consumers and workers alias human capital in the economy.

Politically, irrespective of the massive corporate investment earned from the sweat and blood of the workforce, there will be no power without the people’s vote in a democracy.

Again, the health care reform will be truly meaningful and purposeful when the recommended changes addressing the plight of the people are reflected in the lifetime legislative matter.

It’s time for every American to stand up for their rights and claim the authentic universal health coverage favoring them and not the profit oriented health care industry.

Please call your local representatives and the Senators to oblige to your needs and not the special interests. Only you can make it happen this time.

Power is powerless against the will of the people in politics and economics.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Mobilize America on Health Care Reform

July 26, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Given the partisanship in Washington, the special interests and their representatives in the legislature along with the repugnant network, are emboldened more than ever to kill the health care reform simply because they are deluded in their employment security with a premium health care and a handsome reward from the industries hiring them to stomp the process.

This whole hysteria about the government incapable of handling anything right is nothing but a calculated propaganda by the health care conglomerate reluctant to part with the thriving profiteering racket within the industry.

Who is actually responsible for the current economic mess, worsening unemployment, environmental deterioration and fluctuating energy crisis?

It’s none other than the Corporations running the world empire from the financial markets, health care, energy down to the government. The Corporations through enormous funding into election campaigns and beyond successfully force their agenda by proxy in the legislation as currently witnessed in the health care, energy and financial debacle.

A classic example is the ominous California budget – deal struck between the recalcitrant Republican authorities comprising the Governor, the minority group and the special interests at the expense of the nation’s future i.e. everything to do with children from their health, human services to education and the environment.

The rumor on the rising lack of confidence among the American public towards the government performance is due for a truthful and candid explanation to demystify the myth created by the oligarchs.

The handling of Iraq war, Katrina, financial crisis and the gamut of catastrophes in the past eight years referred to as the ‘government’ failure in the present debate targeting the health care legislation


During the first term, in the 2000 elections the Supreme Court, the highest Court in the land returning its favor to the political faction by nominating their preferred candidate to the highest office in the land. Never mind about the popular vote and other legitimate factors in a democracy.

In the second term, the pre-meditated premise to invade Iraq besides the precisely calibrated nation unable to reject a wartime President despite the scandals and looming economic crisis camouflaged with color coded national security threat tactics, notwithstanding the deliberate malfunctioning of the electronic voting machines was symbolic in the ‘so-called’ democratic election.

Ironically, the nation particularly the privileged lawmakers with some of them having direct access to the classified information abdicated their constitutional oath to defend the sovereignty from peril, instead followed the historically deceitful administration in droves and completely swept off their feet in the ‘weapons of mass deception’ moment. They not only supported the President George W. Bush leading the nation literally to the Death Valley but also rallied behind the propaganda war machines in the media.

Perhaps, if there were any consideration then for the impact on the national deficit and the long-term economic turmoil, their constituents as the citizens of the United States would not be at the mercy of the corporate power pulling strings on the puppet legislators.

However, now when there is a real opportunity for the people to lead the governance of the nation in the most important issue of health care concerning their own life and the loved ones, the polarization on both sides of the political aisles is not surprising.

If the issue is all about costs then the legislators must earnestly review the prevailing costs driven predominantly by the health industry’s greed in the disproportionate profits draining the economy by the hour, not to mention the precious lives lost due to the partisan procrastination.

As for the Conservative Democrats, aka the blue dog members stalling the issue based on lower payments for the medical providers in the rural communities, the solution would be to set a fair standard with equal pay for all in the medical community to incentivize medical professionals outreaching the poorly served remote country areas.

This might give another reason for the opponents to distract the legislative course as further increase on the costs; again, the reallocation of the existing redundant costs would effectively address the genuine requirement.

Most legislative matters from the stimulus bills to various legislations are subject to unnecessary gridlock by the opponents on the pretext of the ‘volume’ of the information in the bill. It would save time and resources for the democratic majority and the White House administration to concise the enormity of these bills with clear and specific data relevant to all.

For instance, since utilizing technology to the maximum potential is one of the highlights of this reform, demonstrating the historic legislation with facts and figures to the public and the concerned parties would be authentic. The contemporary health care costs featured on –

The National Coalition on Health Care – NCHC Cost Fact Sheet 2009,

Source: is a yardstick for trimming and improvising the macro health care budget.

The presentation must involve categories and important details such as:

What are the deductibles and co-payments under public option?

Is there any variation in costs with respect to the visit to a doctor’s office and the hospital?

Having multiple tiers in the coverage would be beneficial to both the public option plan and the consumers. The healthy population with no health insurance as a result of the current exorbitant insurance cost might be better off with at least a basic coverage for emergencies. Similarly, enabling the population with pre-existing illnesses subscribe to the appropriate insurance coverage and others depending on the personal medical history and conditions purchase the desirable and affordable coverage under public option.

Human Genomics science will enormously aid in this regard.

Certain procedures and treatments are available in private clinics and medical centers. Will the public option cover patients using those facilities for convenience and easy access, if the medical expenses are comparable – being less or equal?

Does the public option parallel with the private sector in the mandatory referrals from the primary care providers and the hierarchy for hospital treatments and procedures?


Public option simplified with the hospital administration electronically verifying and billing the government by eliminating the intermediaries.

Under the exclusively private enterprise health care system, mothers and their new born babies after child birth are regularly forced out of the hospitals within twenty four to forty eight hours only to be readmitted for any complications arising from haste delivery. Thus costing everyone involved more and generating profit for the hospital industry, while the liability transferred on to the ‘supposedly’ safe and satisfied healthy insured clients by the insurance industry.

Relating to a personal experience, despite possessing the best/expensive insurance coverage during childbirth in the United States with one child born in the U.S. under the private health care system, when compared with the similar experience in the public-private medicine in Australia for another childbirth made a world of difference.

In both situations, the problems were identical with the babies developing neonatal jaundice, a common occurrence yet in the U.S.; it involved readmission in the hospital and boarding for the mother to facilitate nursing the baby undergoing treatment for the illness. By contrast, in Australia, the mother and child monitored until complete recovery and were able to deal with the same problem during that course costing less and simultaneously avoiding other health issues.

Does public option cover all aspects of health problems in the realm of modern medicine?

How much will it cost the average citizen and the insurer i.e. the government for the basic coverage?

Laying out the costs for the different tiers and categories from the pediatric to geriatric care would clarify the doubts and skepticism in the public mind. In addition, the Medicare and Medicaid situation needs elaboration under the new plan.

What the healthy insured do not realize with the status quo is, the unreasonable premiums to the insurance industry through employer-employee contributions, and above all the excess costs incurred on others with serious medical issues distributed across the board by default. The insurance industry constantly penalizes the healthy and under-utilized insurance holders by relieving itself from the financial burden created by their own profit-oriented policy.

Other matter related to the pre-existing illnesses and unaffordability is costing the county hospitals tremendously and ultimately paid by the taxpayers rather than the system with a universal coverage.

No matter how hard the opponents try to masquerade the national health care crisis under the free enterprise management, the overwhelming truth is the health care in the United States is in shambles and need urgent overhauling with respect to quality, choice and costs as urged by the President Barack Obama.

The U.S. economy cannot sustain the burgeoning health care costs and allow the health care industry continue with the ‘business as usual’ philosophy that is increasingly becoming a personal health and financial nightmare for every American.

If all fails in light of the numerous accounts and sufferings shared by the millions of citizens, it’s time for every unemployed and underemployed American to consider running for the public office in 2010 elections and remove the stalemate contributors in the state capitols and Washington from the path towards national progress and prosperity.

The uninsured and unemployed citizens as the future office bearers must note that seeking a position in the public office not only assures a job security but also comes with the best health coverage that they are being deprived of now.

Only a political challenge can bring about the real change to the system contaminated by the deadly carcinogens called the special interests.

Please mobilize America by calling the public office holders representing every constituent to honor the oath and safeguard the interests of the people entrusting power to them in a democracy and not the lobbyists financing their campaigns.

The health care reform is a life and death matter. It’s like a wildfire that would burn down the common habitat regardless of its origin.

So, please act immediately for your own survival and rescue your loved ones from the tyranny of
profit seeking multinational free market.

Change is real when it happens from the bottom up rather than the top bottom.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Health Care Reform

July 11, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The U.S. Senate is reviewing the components of the much-required health care reform bill. Obviously, the free market profiteers represented by the Insurance industry, hospitals, healthcare providers, Pharmaceutical companies and the entire enterprise strongly lobbying against the public option involving federal health care. Simultaneously, a tentative agreement by the hospitals and health care providers to reduce Medicare and Medicaid costs by $155 billion over a decade has been subject to immense speculation.

The opposition minority along with the cynics and the skeptics are vigorously contesting the legislation on the pretext – ‘tax’ and ‘fiscal responsibility’, an all time favorite issue.

Since the national health care estimated to cost over trillion dollars, the debate premised on choice, costs, and quality in accordance with President Obama’s primary objective of this crucial legislation.

Therefore, it’s important to address the concerns and criticisms from the respective quarters in all three perspectives.

Choice or Option:

Evidently, the free market’s resistance via lobbyists against the federal health care confirms the unwillingness to compromise on disproportionate profits at national expense and dominance in the national health care desperately due for major overhaul, even though the opposition minority claims satisfaction with the existing system regardless of the exorbitant costs enforcing the ‘average’ millions to remain uninsured and underinsured.

Unequivocally the present health care is fabulous for the privileged few particularly the lawmakers, the corporate executives and the fortunate healthy population with health insurance in reserve for emergencies. Unfortunately, the same system is neither empathetic nor conducive for those with pre-existing illnesses or children in families with congenital medical conditions and millions simply unable to afford the ‘supposedly’ competitive state of the art health care as declared by the opposition.

The reasons offered by the opposition defending the special interests investing millions of dollars in legislative votes to oppose federal health care, do not correlate with the status quo.

Despite the misnomer that current system is inexpensive without federal health care option, the exclusively private sectors run industry unable to offer any affordable insurance for a sizable population urgently in need of health care.

The real explanation being the system superbly efficient at a premium price, cost effective although draining the national economy predominantly profit driven with an utter disregard for the ethics or economics ultimately hurting the core national base, the vulnerable majority.

It’s clear from the defiance to the public option comprising federal health care viewed as a threat to phenomenal profits by the free market saturating the system with higher costs, limited choice and substandard care through the selection and elimination process leading the other competitors to adapt to similar strategy for survival and success.

Such practices and policies have allowed the free market to override harsh realities experienced by the ailing and dying population deeply affected by the ominous system prioritizing profits over public health.

It’s no surprise that the lobbyists are enabling the selective legislators and the media with the ammunition to curb the federal health care option favoring the entire population wellness against the broken system.

Another form of public option with the co-operatives by non-profit private groups or state run system considered an alternative to the federal health care. Again, it’s not a viable course of action to compete effectively with the health care conglomerate specifically given the dismal fiscal crisis like in the state of California. Nevertheless, the irony in the firm stance against government program is intriguing with the acceptance of states’ operation while rejecting the federal management.

The federal health system foes are fostering ideas and strategies doomed to fail in an effort to prevail in the free market monopoly with some legislators seemingly complicit in the agenda not barring the conflict of interest revealed in the latest disturbing news reports against them.

In the ‘choice’ aspect, the legislators must execute the power granted by their constituents to stand for the people against special interests by enacting the federal health care in public option as an integral part of the health care legislation.

Costs or Funding:

Yet another contentious issue creating huge barriers between the people and the profit seekers supported by the partisans is the trillion dollar costs to fund the program. The self-funding proposal aimed at saving costs from the non-functional system replaced with efficient and innovative techniques along with costs reduction by health care industry should facilitate insurance for the uninsured through federal option.

Conventional wisdom and experience dictates that it’s not possible to derive the trillion dollars funding from savings alone without generating payments from accessible sources – as it is the case in the state or national deficit reduction. Hence, President Obama’s proposal to cap deductions on employee health benefits claimed by corporations is a reasonable approach to health care financing.

Further, costs distribution via nominal tax surcharge applied on avenues earning extraordinary income i.e. over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples, along with employer contribution through a fee or tax based on percentage of worker’s salary to aid health benefits should adequately solve the equation.

It’s necessary to underscore the surtax and employer contribution fee favoring the small business owners with huge savings in providing the necessary health benefits via federal health care to their labor force, a vital capital resource to survive in the competitive cash strapped economy. Something, the free market could have offered in the non-governmental environment instead stayed focused on exploiting the system with mega profits.

Of course, there is going to be outcry with political humor like – nation socialized with ‘Robin Hood’ motto, President Obama please spare us with your “Change” theme as we might all end up asking one another to spare a ‘change’ in the revolutionary health care reform.

Humor apart, the seriousness lies in the lack of robust competition to keep the costs down and provide quality care. Another opposition’s grievance against federal participation deserves attention i.e. legislators perpetually scornful towards anything to do with their own organization viz. government sponsored projects, programs and services, reaction strangely implying self-deprecation of the political power representing the people.

Interestingly though, such entities are surely elected by their constituents i.e. people in a democracy but they swear allegiance to the Corporations funneling money into their campaigns and beyond.

It’s technically a democracy electing officials to protect the interests of the free market triumphant in widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots aside from dragging the nation to insolvency as witnessed in the finance sector and automobile industry.

In the tax issue, the opposition argument targeted at equalization of tax code. What it means is while the corporations claim deductions from health care benefits to their employees, similar tax relief not extended to private individuals presumably forced to purchase health insurance under the impending plan.

Although, the presentation posed as advocating for the people, essentially it helps the Corporations selling insurance in the strictly private run industry by transferring the liability on to the government through tax credit and revolving back to the tax payer funded health insurance only benefiting the profit seeking corporations rather than the taxpayer themselves.

Clearly, there are many opportunities to provide for the long overdue national health care costs and tragically, the legislative matter politicized by the opponents in compliance with the special interests order.

Care/Quality and Quantity:

The major objection from the opposition is the apparent government rationing of the health care and subsequent effects on the quality citing examples such as the Canadian and the British National Health Care system allegedly dysfunctional because of the government engagement with emphasis on the prolonged waiting period having a direct toll on the patients diagnosed for certain medical conditions. In other words, the deterioration in quality linked to the neglect of preventive medicine proven cost effective than treatment care.

The opposition argument might be legitimate; however, it does not transcend reality.

In this context, the Insurance industry dominated free market authored the “pre-existing” illness code apart from emerging as the champion in discounting and dismissal of genuine medical conditions leading to numerous lawsuits and out-of-court settlements. Notably all of them attributed to negligence and excessive insurance company intervention as evidenced in the grueling and agonizing experiences shared by thousands of victims and health care providers through various outlets.

On several occasions, the pro-health care reformers confronted by the anti-reform movement demanding the name of an international system successfully meeting the national requirements in terms of choice, cost and care. In fact, among the many industrialized nations the Scandinavian country Sweden provides excellent national health care from preventive medicine to cure and the achievement made all possible primarily as the world’s highest taxpayers.

Other hypothesis includes the Medicare and Medicaid payments to hospitals escalating beyond the actual costs over the decade calculated on the number or quantity and not the quality. The private groups reflecting the opposition’s sentiments against the federal health care suggested ‘Pay for quality’ in the bill resembling the Obama plan pledged to promote prevention, treatment and cure.

Amidst agreements and fallouts, a common flaw detected in both groups i.e. the federal system consisting federal agencies for approval on minor to major patient care as a stopgap measure to curtail expenses from medical practices shielding itself against malpractice lawsuits and investment recovery on medical equipments through patient insurance. Any form of over-indulgence will drive the costs in this matter.

It’s best for both federal and private health care to remove bureaucracy and intrusion between patients and health care professionals with unnecessary pre-authorizations causing delay in diagnosis and cost increase. Electronic guidelines on standard medical procedures for common illnesses are an ideal cost reduction method.

Finally, as there are many other issues to address in the immediate future, the analysis with solutions in the health care topic concludes strongly recommending federal run health care as a public option competing on even keel with the private sector to accomplish the general mission – universal health coverage guaranteed to heal the frail economy and the suffering citizens.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant