Remember how the Democrats did it. They created Obamacare behind closed doors. There was no real pubic vetting. No real attempt to make sure the pieces fit together in a sensible way. And no possibility of a single vote from the other party.
The House Republican Leadership seems enamored of that approach. The latest GOP replacement plan was announced last Monday after weeks of secrecy. The two relevant committees began their markup two days later – with no hearings, no vetting, no CBO score and no amendments.
It does not lower costs. It insures many fewer people. It does not stop the race to the bottom in the exchanges that is so harmful to the chronically ill.Instead, the GOP plan seems designed to make the individual market work better. That means helping Obamacare work better. For all the apparent differences, the Republicans are just as committed to the managed competition model as the Democrats were.
Latest Blog Posts
“Just as health insurance is not health care, so too health insurance reform is not health care reform. Yet, because the ACA got so much press, and many previously uninsured individuals did secure insurance (giving us all the warm and fuzzies), the result was a nationwide misconception that affordable insurance equates with affordable health care. For many, ObamaCare is therefore viewed as a success because millions of uninsured Americans are now insured.
“…available evidence from clinical and preclinical studies indicates that LCHF diets consistently improve all other markers of cardiovascular risk—lowering elevated blood glucose, insulin, triglyceride, ApoB and saturated fat (especially palmitoleic acid) concentrations, reducing small dense LDL particle numbers, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, blood pressure and body weight while increasing low HDL-cholesterol concentrations and reversing non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). This particular combination of favourable modifications to all these risk factors is a benefit unique to LCHF diets.”
A coalition of six Republican senators sponsor Senate Bill 50 (SB50). Titled the “Direct Primary Care Act,” the legislation specifies that direct primary care agreements (sometimes called medical retainer agreements) do not constitute insurance, thereby freeing doctors and patients from the onerous requirements and regulations under the state insurance code.
A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Chapter 7 of Title 33 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to kinds of insurance, limits of risks, and reinsurance, so as to provide definitions…
Source: GEORGIA: Will SB50 Make It Past Crossover [Bill] Day in Georgia Legislature? — SB50 passed the Senate by a 49-0 vote on Feb. 21 — SB50 Referred now to House Insurance Committee, must pass by a majority – The Direct Primary Care Journal
Great tutorial that can get you up-to-speed on the budget and how it won’t balance under current trajectory. Senator Paul explains a simple way to balance and control the debt.
“Our Gutenberg is, of course, the internet where technical and scientific writings, once the province of specialists, can now be viewed by many and where they can be discussed widely. Publishers of many journals try to maintain pay-walls in keeping with somebody’s observation that publishers’ function used to be to make new information available while now they work to make information unavailable. (Many simultaneously cash in on open access which charges the authors outrageous fees). Whether the availability of scientific facts is out-weighted by proliferation of alternative facts is open to question but, on balance, we have a view, not only of the science, but of the inner workings of the health agencies that might otherwise be visible to only a few. And that’s how we have extensive access to the Fettke case and an associated Diet convened by the Australian Senate.
As reported by Marika Sboros, Fettke “cannot tell patients not to eat sugar. Why not? Because the country’s medical regulatory body, Australian Health Practitioners Regulatory Authority (AHPRA), says so….It has been investigating Fettke for more than two years now. That was after the first anonymous complaint from a DAA dietitian in 2014. Earlier this year, AHPRA told Fettke to stop talking about nutrition until it had decided on a suitable sanction.” and — I’m not making this up — “informed Fettke that it was investigating him for ‘inappropriately reversing (a patient’s) type 2 diabetes…’”
Dr. Gary Fettke testified at an Australian Senate Inquiry on November 1. and just “by coincidence,” a few days later, the APHRA 2 1/2 year investigation came to an end and Fettke was told that he would be constrained from giving nutritional advice. In the end, this did not sit well with the Senate which undertook further hearing interrogating Martin Fletcher, the CEO of APHRA.”
Our 2015 paper, Low-carbohydrate diets as the first approach in the treatment of diabetes. Review and evidence-base, summarized the clinical experience and the research results of the 26 authors. M…