what does religion have to do with not wanting to use govt force to make people pay for something they morally disagree with? that seems like common sense to me.

Most of Paul Tushcy's abortion rant has nothing to do with public funding of abortions. He is just using it as a cover to defund Planned Parenthood which perform a bunch of services other than abortion.

The other two amendments he posts out here are nothing more than right wing legislation to make abortions (which are legal) more and more difficult. What next Mr Tuschy are right wing legislature going to take over the practice of Medicine and take over the role of the AMA to determine how to deliver medicine in this state ?

what more is there to say about the public funding of abortions? Is he supposed to get into why thats wrong or should he trust you to come up with that on your own?

I think Tuschy has been very clear in his message that the government has no business being involved in medicine at all. They dont do a good job and the cost to run it is out of control so why you would think that he would want them to do more?

I think its safe to say that most peopel would agree that if abortions are going to happen in this state then they should at least be performed in the presence of a doctor and in a place that is safe.

You say you are worried about what the republicans will do next but I ask what the democrats are going to make us pay for next? I DO NOT agree with abortion and yet I have to pay for it because reps like Joe Atkins vote to use government to force me to. That is wrong no matter how you slice it Ray.

Huh ? It looks like Mr DeBerg missed my entire point. Funding for Planned Parenthood was probably for services other than abortions.

Also, we are not debating ObamaCare or its state variants here. I am only pointing out that right wing legislators wanna play Doctor with doctor-patient relationships. If you want safe medicine then i trust you will let the medical community decide what is safe AND what is cost effective. I trust most of the legislators who sponsored such right wing legislation would not know the difference between a syringe and a sewing needle.

There are lot of things that are in law that even I do not wish to pay for. For example, corporate subsidies. Unfortunately the legislative process does not allow citizens line item vetoes. Until of course the entire process of legislating is changed into an EBAY like bidding process for every line item spending down to what the state spends for toilet paper.

Seems to me that the PPACA is doing exactly that - butting in on the doctor/patient relationship in the name of cost control. That's what the IPAB is about - choosing "best practices" that doctors will be "encouraged" to follow (or else!). Isn't that the Federal government deciding what is safe, and what is effective - for the entire country?

Why don't you go to your dentist and ask for a tooth implant. The dentist is going to tell you to pay out of your pocket, because it is not covered by the insurance company. We currently have private insurance companies determining what is "best practice" that actually come between you and your doctor.

Could you now tell me if you have a private insurance, how the IPAB is going to dictate your treatment.

Exactly, except that with the IPAB there is a difference.

With my dentist, I pay the bill and I decide what he does. Period. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

http://mendotaheights.patch.com/blog_posts/freedom-and-the-power-to-choose

With my doctor, I also pay the bill, either directly, or indirectly (through insurance). In any case, I get to decide. If the insurance company decides not to "cover" my choice, I still decide, but I may have to pay.

With the IPAB, it goes beyond simply recommending treatment. The IPAB (and/or other PPACA mechanisms) impose institution-wide penalties on providers that do not "measure up". In a sense, I am not allowed to pay the bill, so I don't get to decide.

Remember, Medicare and Medicaid started out as "insurance" with the feds paying the bills. The cost of that got out of hand, so they were forced to cut costs, and they did so simply by paying providers less. This is why doctors are "dropping" medicare patients. This is why the "doc fix" keeps getting passed in Congress. This is why doctors who treat medicare patients are not allowed to take private payments.

This is also why the feds, having failed to control costs, are seizing control of medicine, and trying to force doctors to do what they consider "best practices", with no provision for you or me paying the bill - or getting to decide.

The IPAB is different.

Not exactly. If you disagree with the IPAB guideline you are always welcome to open your wallet and pay for as money cosmetic surgeries, x-rays, or any other treatments that you believe is your best treatment. That is no different from the insurance that we get thru anywhere today.

With regards to your "scare" that doctors do not accept Medicare:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/15/us-column-miller-medicare-idUSBRE87E15N20120815

"This issue is monitored closely by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), an independent Congressional agency charged with advising Congress on Medicare. The agency's most recent annual survey of Medicare patients found that just 2 percent of beneficiaries had problems of any kind finding a new primary care doctor willing to accept Medicare - the same percentage of patients aged 50-64 with private insurance who report problems.

Likewise, just 2.1 percent report trouble of any kind finding specialists willing to accept Medicare, compared with 2.3 percent for patients with private insurance."

That article further states that the cost of administering Medicare is growing at a lower rate than private health insurance. Further debunking your claims.

The IPAB has not gotten started. The PPACA has not fully taken effect. When the IPAB has the power to punish institutions and individual doctors, we'll see if they will permit "disfavored" procedures. I don't want to find out.

There is no "scare" about Medicare. It's true. Doctors make less money with Medicare patients. That's why many doctors or hospitals have stopped taking Medicare patients.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/06/study-one-third-of-doctors-wouldnt-take-new-medicaid-patients-last-year/

http://host.madison.com/news/local/health_med_fit/madison-clinic-s-decision-to-stop-taking-new-medicare-patients/article_70520894-72c8-11e1-a7d0-0019bb2963f4.html

Google "doctors stop taking medicare" and enjoy.

I am amazed by the link you posted. I quote: "Obamacare does cut $700 billion in Medicare spending over a 10-year period. But the cuts are adjustments in payments to Medicare providers, which are mostly meaningless to patients."

Wow. So the Medicare can cut their payments to doctors, and the doctors will not be affected at all? Cool. I wonder how that would work with my dentist. "Hi, I'm going to pay you half of all my future bills, but you have to do all the same work."

I don't think so.

Donald, you may want to read the very link you have posted really carefully.

"Here’s the correlation she found between how much a state pays its Medicaid doctors (indexed as a percent of the Medicare reimbursement rate) and the percent of physicians accepting new Medicaid patients:"

That means once again, i have debunked your Mediscare claims.

Nonsense. The article says clearly that lower payments induce doctors to stop serving new Medicaid patients. The economic lesson is ironclad. Nothing has been "debunked".

That's why every year when the Medicare "cuts" come around in Congress, the Congress passes the "doc fix", which raises the Medicare reimbursement rates to closer to market rates. That's why the "doc fix" does, and is why it is a "must pass".

It's time to wake up and recognize Econ 101, and stop pretending that it can be ignored. Repeating nonsense does not make it true.

and I forgot - the "doc fix" is one big reason why Medicare cost continue to rise beyond projections......

Donald, once again read the snippet from the very link that you posted.

"Here’s the correlation she found between how much a state pays its Medicaid doctors (indexed as a percent of the Medicare reimbursement rate) and the percent of physicians accepting new Medicaid patients:"

Those are not my words. Those are from the very article you posted. Thus far I have shown
- That Medicaid paitents have no more difficulty than privately insured patients in obtaining doctor appointments
- Reimbursements by state Medicaid NOT Medicare are responsible for doctors leaving the system
- The cost of administering Medicare has not gone up faster than private insurance.

All you do is state right wing talking points, and walk away when some challenges them !!!

Those who insist on believing something will not be dissuaded. A Google search for "doctors accept no more medicare" brings up volumes of material confirming that paying doctors less drives them away. This is common sense.

Medicare may have "low overhead", but it also has "massive fraud". A Google search for "medicare fraud rampant" again brings up volumes of material confirming that there is a serious problem. Again common sense - the solution is to work harder to catch fraudsters - driving up "overhead" costs.

For better or worse, reality is catching up with Medicare, and these discussions are largely academic.

My post: http://mendotaheights.patch.com/blog_posts/the-end-of-medicare
outlines the reality.

Donald - When every rational argument, pointing to your own links that contradict your mediscare claims, your answer is "search on google".

Similarly on Social Security, I asked you to factually contradict someone you had criticized. Your answer. "Search on google".

Well Donald. If you "Search on Google", one can even prove that Obama is a citizen of Kenya !!!

It is not helpful to call positions irrational. I merely suggest that people make their own judgements. They have to do that in any case.

"It is not helpful to call positions irrational. I merely suggest that people make their own judgements. They have to do that in any case."

"Nonsense" - that was a word you used. Not me. And of course used no verified facts to back up your words.

Would it be safe to say that most of your positions are just your opinions and are mostly not entirely based on facts. Just "search google"

Thank you, Jeff.

Personal attacks and ad hominem insults have no place in these discussions. If you can't share your opinions like respectful adult, they are not welcome on Patch.

That Thomas, would be your opinion. Why stop at calling a fertilized egg a baby. Why don't you just call the sperm a life and claim that using a contraceptive is murder.

Thomas, why don't you tell me how an egg is a baby ? Or how is sperm a baby. Also since you are the genius of medical procedures, do you have another medical procedure to suggest when doctors have to save the life of a mother or an unviable fetus. Did you coauthor a book on alternative medicine with Todd Aikin ?

Thomas, why are you avoiding a simple question? What is the MEDICAL name of this procedure. I mean if this was such a prevalent and gruesome procedure I'm sure there was a MEDICAL name and MEDICAL data for it.

Now certainly you are not making up some FAKE MEDICAL term like legitimate rape are you ? On youtube, i can even prove to u that Obama is a Kenyan citizen. Honest

Thomas, you stated a specific sequence of steps that you claimed was a medical procedure. All i am asking you is to show me a MEDICAL reference that states that those steps are in ALL ABORTIONS or ANY SPECIFIC ABORTION that is documented by a MEDICAL authority. Why is it so hard ?

Or is it like "legitimate rape" where the right invents a medical terminology that does not exist and then runs away from it when questioned.

Thomas - You are do busy to name a single abortive procedure that you "described" in great detail. I did not ask you for a list of all procedures or any compendium on abortive procedure. I just asked you to name that single one.

You've responded at least five times, giving all kind of excuses, however you claim you are too busy ?

If you cannot name that one single procedure, how do i know you are not making it up. Why is this not similar to how right wing made up a new crime called "legitimate rape" and then ran away from it when people started asking questions ?

How can i judge something when you can't even name the procedure ?

Thomas - "Why didn't you address the issue of sucking the babies brain out and breaking it to pieces? "

Which one of the abortion procedures you point to in the above link points to this ?

Let me see. Here is what i read from it.

"Partial birth abortion is not a medical term;
...
The term "partial birth abortion" was coined in 1995 by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) in hopes it would spur anti-abortion response. "

So you want me to comment on a "procedure" that was made up by non-doctors ?

Thomas - I'm posting from the very link you gave me. Now you are calling me unreasonable. Aren't you being the one who is being unreasonable by posting some made up hyperbole about abortions ?