Posts tagged with: Health/Medical/Pharmaceuticals

hospitalA new provision under Obamacare will fine tax-exempt hospitals via the Internal Revenue Service:

A new provision in Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, which takes effect under Obamacare, sets new standards of review and installs new financial penalties for tax-exempt charitable hospitals, which devote a minimum amount of their expenses to treat uninsured poor people. Approximately 60 percent of American hospitals are currently nonprofit.

(more…)

Obamacare-trainTomorrow is the big day for Obamacare, despite the fact that even the Obama Administration admits it’s “glitchy.” The president is cheerleading the program, reminding us that he’s been right all along:

Reforming health care will help the economy over the long-term,” by curing health-care costs and free individuals to start small companies, he said.

Through his speech, Obama ridiculed critics of his plan, which imposes far-reaching federal requirements on one-sixth of the nation’s economy. (more…)

Blog author: ehilton
Monday, September 9, 2013
By

Crowded emergency room waiting area.The Obama Administration is counting down the days and rounding up “navigators” to get Obamacare off the ground. (Those navigators, by the way, will get $58 for each person they sign up, on top of their hourly pay.) The big question: Is Obamacare going to work? Will it deliver better health to Americans? There are a lot of skeptics, including Forbes’ Paul Howard. Howard’s concern is that Obamacare is using mid-20th century assumptions about health and insurance in a 21st century world.

Washington’s view of health care remains deeply entrenched in mid-century assumptions about health and illness.  Health care via industrial policy makes sense if illness is an Act of God to which all are equally vulnerable and a known quantity of health care can be delivered to everyone at a fixed price.   If these assumptions are true, the largest payer – the government – can set the rules of the road, from which all (or almost all) benefit.

That was a reasonable picture of medicine well into the 20th century…when infectious diseases dominated U.S. deaths.  But by 1950, heart disease and cancer had displaced infections as the nation’s most potent killers.  (“Diseases of early infancy” was still the fourth-leading cause of death in 1950. By 2010, they had dropped off the table entirely.)

(more…)

Ever since the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that requiring most employers to cover birth control, abortificients and abortions as part of employee health care coverage, there has been a firestorm of attention pill in handfocused on the mandate. Both secular and religious employers have fought the order, stating that it violates their moral and/or religious principles to pay for these things, which many do not believe fall into the category of “health care.” (See Acton PowerBlog posts here, here, and here.)

Today, August 1, was the date the mandate was to go into effect. However, HHS has given a “stay” for religious non-profits until January 2014. That isn’t good enough for the group “Women Speak For Themselves” (WSFT), founded by Helen Alvaré, Professor of Law at George Mason University. In today’s Washington Post, Alvaré and Meg T. McDonnell give 5 reasons why women care about this mandate. She says, in the words of one of the organization’s members that these women “don’t want anyone buying the phony message the government is selling…that ‘women care more about free birth control than freedom of religion.'” WSFT backed up their convictions by protesting today in Lafayette Park across from the White House. (more…)

If the National Bureau of Economic Research is to be believed, Obamacare stands to cause more than 1 million Americans to shift from work to welfare. Why? America will lose an abundance of low-paying full-time jobs to relieve employers ofoperation-game health-care cost burdens. The Wall Street Journal recently reported:

[A] number of restaurants and other low-wage employers say they are increasing their staffs by hiring more part-time workers to reduce reliance on full-timers before the health-care law takes effect.

“I’d be surprised if the Affordable Care Act didn’t have something to do with” the pickup in part-time hiring, said Paul Dales, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics. “Companies don’t want to pay for health care unnecessarily if they can avoid it, so they’ll try to avoid it.” However, he said “the effects will be harder to discern in the data.”

(more…)

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared the sale of the “morning-after pill” (such as Plan B) for teens as young as 15, with no need for parental consent, and mandated that the drug no longer can be kept behind the pharmacy counter. Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, believes there are “daunting and sometimes insurmountable hoops women are forced to jump through” when faced with a crisis pregnancy and that this measure is a step forward for women’s health. While there are conflicting opinions as to whether or not these medications cause abortions, there is no doubt that the side effects for the female taking the medication can be harsh, including hypertension, depression and ovarian cysts. morning after

What is disturbing to many is the fact that this move by the FDA now gives human traffickers a way to stop or end pregnancies in young girls being trafficked, with no medical care or follow-up. For instance, LiveAction did several “sting” operations at Planned Parenthood facilities around the country to see if workers in those facilities would follow mandated laws to report suspected sexual abuse of a minor. Over and over, workers were complicit in covering up what was presented as minor girls acknowledging having sex with much older men. In 2008, MSNBC reported that sex trafficking victims were “compelled to perform sex acts 12 hours a day and were subjected to beatings, rape and forced abortions.” With now-easy access to “morning-after” pills, sex traffickers won’t even have to visit a clinic; they can simply send a girl into the local pharmacy for the drug. No fuss, no muss…no medical follow-up, no chance for a medical professional to question the teen for her safety, her health, her well-being. (more…)

Blog author: jballor
Monday, April 1, 2013
By

In the current Acton Commentary, I take a look at what I call a “modern-day Robinson Crusoe,” the survivalist Richard Proenneke of “Alone in the Wilderness” fame.

But as I also note in the piece, there are some other instances of this classic shipwrecked literary device, including the TV show Lost. The basic point of these reflections on community and the human person is that no man is an island, even when they are on an island.

Consider this speech with the conclusion “if we can’t live together, we’re going to die alone,” from Jack Shephard, in Lost episode 1.5, “White Rabbit.”

As the tagline of the “Hang Together” blog reminds us, the dynamic between human sociality and community is at the heart of the American experiment in ordered liberty. As Benjamin Franklin put it, “We must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

In addition to internal logical inconsistencies which raise serious concerns of long term economic sustainability regarding the Affordable Care Act (ACA), recently analyzed by John MacDhubhain, Robert Pear reports in the New York Times over the weekend how confusion over certain ambiguities in the law (ironically over the meaning of the word “affordable”) would end up hurting some of the people it is precisely designed to help: working class families.

Pear writes,

The new health care law is known as the Affordable Care Act. But Democrats in Congress and advocates for low-income people say coverage may be unaffordable for millions of Americans because of a cramped reading of the law by the administration and by the Internal Revenue Service in particular.

Under rules proposed by the service, some working-class families would be unable to afford family coverage offered by their employers, and yet they would not qualify for subsidies provided by the law.

Read more . . .

Acton On The AirKishore Jayabalan, Director of Acton’s Rome Office, was called upon this morning by America’s Morning News to weigh in with the view from Rome on the Obama Administration’s HHS mandate that most employers – including religious institutions – provide contraceptives, sterilization, and abortifacient drugs as part of health care coverage. He did so, and you can listen to the interview by using the audio player below:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Previous Acton commentary on the mandate decision:
Audio: Dr. Donald Condit on the Trampling of Conscience Protections
Jayabalan: Obamacare vs. the Catholic Bishops
Dr. Samuel Gregg: Obama and the Dictatorship of Relativism

Even though Ron Paul clarified himself at the Tea Party debate, and explained that he doesn’t think those who can’t afford medical care should be laid out on the curb to die, the Left went about painting his answer as morally abominable. Before we deal with their abuse of Christian doctrine, let’s see what Paul said:

I practiced medicine before we had Medicaid, in the early 1960s, when I got out of medical school. I practiced at Santa Rosa Hospital in San Antonio, and the churches took care of them. We never turned anybody away from the hospitals. And we’ve given up on this whole concept that we might take care of ourselves and assume responsibility for ourselves, our neighbors, our friends, our churches—would do it.

A great answer, it seems to me, and thoroughly Christian, unless you take the United Nations as an instantiation of the Gospel command to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” Liberals latch onto the Good Samaritan aspect of the commandment and think, if my neighbor, then why not the fellow two counties over, two states over, or two countries over?

Newsflash: prudence is a part of moral calculations.

The Good Samaritan was passing by the man who had been beaten and robbed, and was in a position to help him. But while residents of Alaska and Florida are each others’ neighbors in one sense, they cannot be of service to each other in the same way that they can those on their own streets. Moral considerations involve not only intention but also acts themselves, and whether they are likely to succeed (cf. Catholic just war principles).

Furthermore, the federal government might be practically able to assume some of the responsibilities of the Good Samaritan, but no one on the Christian Left has provided an argument why it should—why it would be better for two neighbors to love each other through the government, in some sort of progressive trinity. Otherwise, isn’t it best to let people practice love of neighbor themselves, so that they can store up treasure in Heaven?

Finally, most of the people making these arguments don’t think Congress should pass some sort of Obamacare law for the entire world, but that’s exactly where their thinking leads. Really why not preemptively cover any Martians without access to dental care and free contraception? Well because that would cost too much.