Back to Basics

John Shadegg’s 2^nd Town Hall onAugust 25, 2009

Rep. John Shadegg - Phoenix Town Hall, Aug 25, 2009

AZ-Rep. John Shadegg held his 2^nd of 3 Town Hall meetings last night in Phoenix, Arizona.  There was a good turn out, not quite filling the high school auditorium with people from all ages and backgrounds, including some from other districts because their representatives were not holding town hall meetings.  Everyone was welcome and encouraged to speak freely, but maintain the respect of others.  There were no protestors, not even one picket sign from any point of view.  Two state representatives, Carl Seel and Sam Crump, also made an appearance at the meeting.

Unlike Shadegg’s first town hall meeting, many of the attendees seemed to already be familiar with H.R. 3200 as there were few questions directly relating to specifics in the bill.  Rep. Shadegg introduced his alternative bill, H.R. 3218, which I have previously covered.

One of the concerns expressed was; “Is H.R. 3200 constitutional?” – that is still questionable.  Tom Coburn of Oklahoma has introduced a bill, Enumerated Powers Act (Introduced in Senate) S 1319, which would require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws.  Some Congressmen, including Rep. Shadegg, are asking that question – what authority under the US Constitution allows for the enactment of this bill?

A small number of people expressed their support of a public option, and most of those individuals either had no insurance or a pre-existing condition or chronic illness.  They felt the only way for them to get insurance coverage was through a government option.  They were not concerned how this bill might affect anyone else, they were just thinking about their own situation.  Even though other options were explained to them, they seemed to want what they considered an easy solution in the form of a government option and remained clueless or didn’t comprehend the alternatives.  They just didn’t seem to want to take responsibility for their own health care.

There was a concern voiced about the possible involvement of the insurance industry’s role in the creation of the bill, as it expands the restrictions of ERISA.  ERISA applies to all group insurance policies and limits the responsibility of the insurance company even if they willfully deny coverage that results in death.  The case of Corkran v United Health Care was the case sited, in which the Corkran family lost their baby at birth due to United Health Care’s refusal to authorize treatment prescribed by Mrs. Corkran’s doctor.  Through discovery it was found that United Health Care’s doctor agreed with Mrs. Corkran’s doctor, but treatment had still been denied.  The Corkran’s could collection nothing for their loss.  Did the insurance companies agree to cover pre-existing conditions and chronic illnesses in exchange for this protection?  How will ERISA affect your treatment or ability to receive proper treatment?

Discussion and questions took place on the alternative bill, H.R. 3218, which provides insurance to all Americans through the enrollment of their choice with no government takeover.  Through new pooling mechanisms and tax credits, individuals would be able to make their own decisions and choices on health insurance policies.  If you like your company-offered plan you can keep it.  If you don’t, or are not insured, then you would be given tax credits to purchase a plan for you and your family.

One clarification on the H.R. 3218 plan that had not been previously addressed was covering the person who didn’t purchase a plan.  People are known.  If you have ever had a social security number the government knows you exist.  If an individual failed to respond and did not purchase insurance then money equivalent to the credit would be deposited into a fund.  If one of these individuals visited an emergency room or doctors office, information could be obtained from a national data bank and determine if they were one of these individuals.  If so, treatment would be made under this fund and they would be offered the option of enrolling in a plan of their choice.

Rep. Shadegg also stated he has previously submitted a “Patients Bill of Rights” as well as an amendment enacted in 2006, the “State High Risk Pool Funding Extension Act of 2006.”  This act allows states, with the use of federal funds, to create state high risk pools.  Some states never responded.

People voiced their concerns and frustrations over the government in general, with one gentleman stating that those in Congress should live in the real world to really see what it is like.  Another stated that these bills should be written in language that anyone could understand, including bullet points, and if Congress couldn’t do it he would do it for them.  One person questioned the role of Congressmen, asking how they could even be in office if they were not representing the voice of the people.  Comments like these from citizens, as well as military or ex-military, were voiced because of the government’s lack of concern for the citizens of this nation.

Two people expressed genuine concern over the N1H1 vaccine.  Although many may feel they are way out on the right, they have every right to speak out and were allowed to do so.  They are concerned about the safety of the vaccine itself, and if everyone will be forced to receive the vaccine, even against their will.  The disturbing part was that there was no answer to guarantee this would not happen.

This bill affects everyone.  This country has the highest survival rates for cancer compared to countries who already have government health care.  Why would anyone want to lose that quality of care in favor of a system that has proven in many countries to provide less?  Why do so many come to this country for their treatment?  Could it be they can’t get it, or have to wait too long in theirs?  Why would anyone want to give up their own voice in the control of their own medical care in favor of government control?

So in the end do you want a government run plan with the government making the decisions between you and your doctor?  Or do you want a plan with you in control of choices?  If the government can take over health care decisions, where does it stop?  Do they start selling mandatory auto insurance or homeowners insurance?  Personally, I want choice – keep the government out!