Medical Translation

We’re going to have some fun today. Yesterday, I got a treat. The mail man knocked on my door to deliver a certified letter. The postage on this thing was almost 4 bucks and I had to sign that I had received it. SOUNDS COOL, HUH!

Perhaps you need a little background. You see, my husband was doing a trauma rotation in Phoenix when the AMA announced its decision to endorse Obamacare. I was visiting my family in Utah. Usually, when Nate and I spoke, I got the impression that long work hours and being separated from his family were really weighing on him. He sounded exhausted. But, on this particular day, he had a spark of passion in his voice when he told me, “Guess what I did today…I called the AMA and told them to take my name off their rolls.”

That was the end of it, right? I admit I was surprised when I received membership renewal papers in the mail a couple weeks later, but I just tossed them. Then, yesterday, the certified letter arrived. How fun!

They have not removed my husband from their rolls, instead, the letter informed me, they were writing to “clarify the AMA’s work and address his points before he follows through on the change to his membership status.”

Let the clarifying begin!

The questions and answers I list are direct from the information the AMA so expensively sent to our home. The highlights are added and the alternate colors are translations (added by me) for those of us who aren’t doctors.

Why is the AMA supporting H.R. 3200?

H.R. 3200 contains many elements that reflect AMA priorities for health system reform. These include: expanding the availability of affordable health care coverage to the uninsured, increased support for prevention and wellness services, investments in the physician workforce, increased Medicare payments for primary care services without cutting payments for other services and, importantly, it represents medicine’s best hope for eliminating the current sustainable growth rate (SGR) formula for updating Medicare physician payments. The AMA will continue to work with members of the House of Representatives to improve the bill. Favorable action on a House bill is necessary to move the process toward the end game negotiations that will determine the specifics of a final bill.

(We want to help people and blah, blah, blah…but the real issue is that the SGR, which currently determines the amount of medicare reimbursement, sucks. We are endorcing this to get it thrown out so YOU will have more of the taxpayer dollars with which to pay your skyrocketing taxes. Sweet, eh? Oh, and, BTW, this bill is FAR from settled. So, we thought we’d endorse them now so they can get the votes to get it through the house. That way we can fight with them later about what we really want done. It’s kind of like giving your third grader money to buy school supplies and then sending him to the store alone. He might get school stuff, right?)

Why did AMA react so quickly?

The AMA has been reviewing and submitting detailed comments on draft proposals for several months, as well as engaging in substantive discussions with Congressional leaders and staff. There were a limited number of changes made in a draft of the bill that was released on June 19. So, we were able to complete an analysis of the 1,000+ page bill relatively quickly. Two of the three House committees completed their mark-up of the legislation on July 17 so it was important to voice our views prior to votes in committee.

(You may recall the politicians saying that if we endorsed the bill, we would be allowed a say in future negotiations…What can you do when they’re holding all the cards?)

Does the AMA support all provisions of H.R. 3200?

As is typical with very large bills, H.R. 3200 contains many provisions that we wholeheartedly support, others that concern us, and still other provisions that we want to see changed. We plan to continue our efforts to refine those elements that are inconsistent with our policy as the legislative process progresses. For example, during committee consideration we supported amendments to provide federal support to states that implement liability reforms and to preserve patient access to physician-owned hospitals. This is the beginning of a very lengthy process and we believe our support helps put us in a very favorable position to advocate for important changes when a House and Senate conference committee is appointed to craft a single bill for final passage.

(Yes…No…Maybe…Wait? What was the question again? Right…Well, we figured since it’s going to be a long process, we’d just give our stamp of approval right away. Nobody remembers the ninth person to sign the Declaration of Independence, do they? We felt it was important to get our John Hancock on there right away. We’re pretty sure the founding father’s wished their documents were still works in progress when they signed them.)

Does the AMA support the public plan provisions included in H.R. 3200?

The AMA expressed concerns regarding the public plan provisions outlined in a House draft bill that was circulated on June 19. The public plan provisions in H.R. 3200 represented an improvement over previous draft proposals. Additional changes were made in the public plan provisions during the Energy and Commerce Committee markup that concluded on July 31. These included reaffirmation that physician participation would be voluntary and that physician payments would be negotiated based on private insurance rates rather than be limited to 5% above Medicare fee schedule rates. The Senate is developing different approaches to a public plan. H.R. 3200 would require a public plan to be self-sustaining and independent of the federal treasury. It also does not affect the ability of physicians to engage in private contracting arrangements with patients. We believe that, as the legislative process continues, alternatives and modifications to the public option will be considered and the final product will be considerably different than the provisions contained in the original version of H.R. 3200.

(Of course not! But it was better than the drafts, which were better than my second-grader’s English assignment.)

By supporting health reform legislation that includes a public plan, isn’t the AMA really endorsing socialized medicine?

It truly is regrettable that so many of the important goals we hope to achieve through health system reform have been overshadowed by a headline- grabbing debate over the prospects of creating a coverage option bearing the label “public plan,” without regard to the variety of forms such an option could take. The AMA continues to oppose nationalized health insurance, and we continue to express opposition to elements of public plan proposals that we believe could lead us down the road to a single payer system or “socialized medicine.” However, we remain open to proposals that are consistent with our principles of pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of physicianpractice, and universal access.

(Socialized medicine? That’s a nasty little phrase. We prefer to endorse programs that “Federalize Medicine.” In other words, like President Obama, we recognize that a single-payer system is still years down the road. We need to plant the seeds of something that hopes to one day grow up to be socialized medicine if it works hard and gets into a good college.)

I have heard that as many as 120 million people will be enrolled in the new public option health plan. Is that true?

No. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the bill will ensure that 97% of the legal, non-elderly population will have health insurance. At most, 12 million people would be enrolled in the public plan, representing only about 4% of the entire population. Overall, 37 million uninsured Americans will have health insurance coverage who do not have it now.

(No! At least not until those little “take a number” machines at the DMV can be altered significantly…Now serving number 119,958,752, please have your ticket ready. Oh, and please don’t google nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. We don’t want you to notice that they said we couldn’t afford to implement this program.)

Won't employers simply drop coverage?

Again, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that from 2010 until 2019, the number of Americans with employer provided coverage will increase from 150 million to 162 million people. Additionally, for those Americans who purchase coverage through the Health Insurance Exchange, two-thirds (or 20 million people) will choose private plans. This means a significant increase in the number of American's insured by private insurance plans.

(Private, of course, meaning that they are a part of the uber-regulated government system.)

Does H.R. 3200 make private insurance illegal?

There have been some misleading press reports on this issue. The legislation does not make private insurance illegal. Rather, it regulates health insurance coverage and, except for some “grandfathered” existing policies, individual coverage could only be offered through the Health Insurance Exchange established by the bill. (The Health Insurance Exchange is a regulated market place for people to purchase private coverage that meets minimum criteria.) In fact, the legislation would make great strides in regulating insurers so that they treat patients and providers more fairly.

(See…we’re not getting rid of private insurance. We’re simply redefining private to mean public. It’s akin to redefining grassroots to mean: “sponsored by political interest groups and funded with tax payer money.” )

What about liability reform?

The AMA worked closely with Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN) to authorize state pilot programs for medical liability reforms. The House Energy and Commerce Committee adopted an amendment that authorizes pilot programs for “early offer” and certificate of merit initiatives.

(What about it?)

Does the bill expand scope of practice of nurse practitioners?

Nothing in the bill would allow nurse practitioners to provide care that is beyond their state license. However, the bill would establish a medical home pilot program under Medicare that would allow a nurse practitioner to lead a medical home “so long as…the nurse practitioner is acting consistently with State law.” While the AMA recognizes nurses as valuable members of the health care team, we do not support nurse practitioners practicing independently, without at least regular consultation with a physician. It is the AMA’s policy that a multidisciplinary health care team should be led by a physician who is in the best position to provide coordination of disciplines to assure delivery of high quality patient care.

(Yup…but we don’t like that part.)

Would H.R. 3200 authorize the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to set physician payment rates for all health plans?

No. The Secretary would be required to establish payment rates only under the public health insurance option. Payment rates for the public plan would be set through a negotiation process with the Medicare fee schedule as a starting point and average plan rates in the Health Insurance Exchange as the upper limit.

(He wouldn’t set them. He would negotiate them.)

Would H.R. 3200 eliminate health savings accounts?

H.R. 3200, as introduced, could be interpreted to eliminate this option. However, an amendment was adopted during the House Education and Labor Committee markup that would allow consumer-directed health plans and arrangements, including a highdeductible health plan, to be considered as acceptable coverage under a current group health plan for the first 5 years after the Act is operational.

(Maybe…depends on who’s reading it.)

Would H.R. 3200 allow government bureaucrats to tell physicians how to practice medicine and determine what treatment patients will receive?

H.R. 3200 would not provide the government with the authority to decide what medical treatment patients will receive. It allows patients to select the insurance plan that best suits their needs. H.R. 3200 also includes support for developing information that can be used by patients and physicians to make the best treatment decisions based on the patient’s needs. The bill would not ration care; it would expand access to health care coverage and increase the information needed to support strong clinical decision-making.

(Bureaucrats is another nasty word. We prefer “happy helpers.” The government would “help” you make decisions about your patients. )

Does H.R. 3200 require advance care planning?

The bill would create a new Medicare benefit that allows physicians to bill for the time they spend on advance care planning consultations with Medicare patients. It would not mandate that patients take advantage of this benefit. The new Medicare benefit would allow doctors to be compensated for such consultations every five years, and more frequently if a patient has a life-limiting illness or health status changes. The AMA supports Medicare reimbursement for physician advance care consultations with a patient, and encourages physicians to engage in these discussions with their patients.

(Why are you still asking questions? Aren't you listening? We’re giving you something else to bill for! Why are you complaining about this? Aren’t doctor’s all money-grubbing businesspeople?)

Would H.R. 3200 prohibit patients from privately contracting with physicians, and prohibit physicians from “balance billing” patients?

The bill would not affect the ability of physicians to engage in private contracting arrangements with patients in the context of the public health insurance option or private plans offered within or outside the Health Insurance Exchange. Neither would the bill modify existing Medicare private contracting provisions. The bill allows balance billing under the public health insurance option, with limits mirroring those in Medicare. It also allows out-of-network physicians to privately contract with patients enrolled in the public plan, although those patients would receive no plan reimbursement under these circumstances. The AMA has expressed support for modifying this provision to ensure that public plan patients have a true out-of-network option that better reflects common practices in the private insurance market.

(We’re still working on this one. For now, rest assured that we are promising you at least a 200 percent increase in paperwork.)

Would the provision in H.R. 3200 that replaces the SGR be dropped from the bill
because of Pay-Go rules?

Key House and Senate leaders as well as senior White House officials remain committed to enacting legislation this year that would erase the existing SGR debt and establish a new, more favorable payment structure for Medicare physician payments. It sometimes is confusing when policymakers discuss Congressional Budget Office scoring rules and legislative procedures. Using past scoring approaches, the “budget score” for changing the SGR policy would be $239 billion. This year, we gained the support of House, Senate, and White House policymakers to erase the SGR debt and establish a new payment formula without having to identify budgetary offsets. The term of art is called a “pay-go waiver.”

Recent comments by Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag about “removing the Medicare physician payment fix” were not about jettisoning a change in the SGR policy from health system reform legislation. Rather, he was referring to jettisoning budget scoring estimates, and key policymakers in the House, Senate, and White House continue to support replacing the SGR through a pay-go waiver.

(Um…We hope not, because that’s what we keep repeating as our reason for endorsing the bill in the first place.)

And! My favorite !

Many analyses of H.R. 3200 have been circulating by email that provide detailed and very troubling descriptions of the bill’s provisions and its implications for government control of medicine, rationing care for the elderly, outlawing private health insurance plans, and more. How valid are these criticisms?

Trusted sources such as physician specialty societies have varying views of the legislation based on their organizations’ policies and priorities. However, many of the descriptions being broadly circulated by email make extreme claims based on cursory readings of the legislation supplemented by conjecture and misinterpretations that do not reflect an understanding of current law, medical practice, or insurance regulation. For example, one widely circulated message that includes page-by-page interpretations of the bill’s provisions states in alarming language that the government will mandate a National Health Service Corps. The National Health Service Corps is an existing federal program that most physician organizations agree should be expanded to encourage more residents to choose primary care specialties and to provide care in underserved areas. As is true with all email spam, messages that are repeatedly forwarded from an unknown original source should not be trusted. Physicians are encouraged to consult with the AMA, their state societies, and specialty societies about the accuracy of any legislative interpretations that cause them concern.

(Look, would you stop getting information from other sources? Come to us directly for indoctrination...er…I mean…information.)

So, that’s it. I was perplexed. Did they really think this would change his mind? Perhaps they were just informing him, and trying to hide it, that they did not remove him from their rolls, as requested.

Work hard...Because of who you are

So much has been going on lately that I have thought about commenting on. There has been the Van Jones controversy, the education speech and, most importantly, heath care. But, I have had a few extra responsibilities at home, and these necessarily trump my love of hearing myself type. I laughed at my husband when he lamented not being able to attend the 9/12 march on Washington because, “he had to work.” I explained to him that he couldn’t go because he recognized that some people in this country had to take care of their families and finances, regardless of what the government was doing. We recognize that the future depends on parents who live within their means and make children a priority. We will do it, even when the government does not. But we will be involved by voicing our feelings and TEACHING OUR CHILDREN. I appreciate those people who do not have to choose between protesting and taking care of family obligations. I appreciate those who will be a voice for my children on Saturday.

On the President’s speech to students: It was self-ingratiating for the president. I rolled my eyes at his props to himself. But, I let my kids hear it. They said it was “boring.” (They’re only 5 & 6) I explained to them what was missing from the speech: they had an obligation to do their best in school, not for their country and president, but because they are children of God and cannot waste the precious talents they have been blessed with. Why do we insist on replacing obligation to self, family and Heavenly Father, with obligation to other things? The country? The Earth? President Obama? Is it a desperate plea for meaning from a group of people who have tried so hard to remove inherent value from a human soul? I want my children to know who they are. I hope other parents will take the time to add to the president's speech what it was missing. I am saddened by the number of children who don't seem to know why they ought to live up to their potential.

The thing that entertained me the most was those people who treated the critics like idiots for caring what the students heard. “The first George Bush did the same thing” was their battle cry.

Take a look at this article…Very amusing…

Protect Our Most Precious Resource

Before all else, I am a mother. I have been blessed with four children who continue to amaze and challenge me everyday. Anyone who reads my writing will see the parenting theme laced through everything I say. That is not just because it is the most important thing I am doing. It is because I believe the way to insure that our country is successful is to teach the next generation. I am not talking about pushing more money into education or putting your kids into preschool at two. I am talking about making them a priority and helping them to understand that the values they learn at home will bring more success than the lessons taught at school.

A friend of mine sent me a link to an article about a piece of clear liberal propaganda which was shown to an entire school of elementary students in Utah. The sad thing is that these pieces are meant to be mostly benign. They talk about service and self sacrifice, lacing the poison deep within the sweet truths. But, it’s hard to deny the implications. The last sentence of this video is a celebrity saying, “I pledge to be a servant to President Obama and all mankind.” You can watch it at the end of this blog.

I was disgusted to hear that the White House is using the National Endowment for the Arts to encourage artists to create propaganda for President Obama’s policies. I am wary of the president being broadcast into every elementary school in the nation on Tuesday and the NEA’s proposed lesson plans that encourage children to write letters saying how they would help the president. I will reserve judgment on that until I hear what he says.

But every parent ought to be cautious. As always, YOU should be the dominant force in educating your child. It all reminds me of a quote I read in high school (I can’t remember the source) that said, “Hitler knew just how to indoctrinate. He went straight to the children in their schools. Fascism was taught and children began to turn in their parents for disloyal statements.”

Am I saying this is happening now? No. I am reserving judgment. I am just pointing out that it is our responsibility to teach our children and that history has proven the dangers of slacking off on our most important job.

All that is Good

I know this is not the primary message of this blog, but as I looked at the barrage of disgusting headlines in the news this morning, I found myself unfazed. It would be very hard to discourage me right now.

Let me explain…in addition to being a mother, I have been blessed with the opportunity to serve in my church with a group of local teenage girls. For the past few months, we have been working on a program for our Sunday services. The girls all wrote talks and learned songs to sing. I admit that the other leaders and I were a little bit nervous about whether the whole thing would come together. But yesterday, I got to sit in the audience with my four children and listen to these beautiful girls perform. They were more amazing than we could possibly have hoped for.

One young woman gave a sweet tribute to her father, talking about how his example of love and hard work inspired her to be a better person. Another spoke about how she doesn’t find it difficult to cling to her high morals because she knows that her life has been blessed by them. One even said she knew what her leaders sacrifice to spend time with her and it helps her to understand the importance of the things we teach. These girls are so young, yet they are the kind of people that make you want to believe in the goodness of the world.

I am posting this today because I want everyone to understand that, although I often highlight the bad, there is much more good in this world. I want the cynics to understand why I repeat over and over that I believe in people and that is why I cling to freedom so tenaciously. I want the parents to understand that when you expect miracles from children, you will find them stepping up to the plate with more grace than you can imagine.

Yesterday I heard a fifteen-year-old girl give the most beautiful testimony as she sang one of my favorite songs:

“Walk tall, you’re a daughter, a child of God.
Be strong and remember who you are.
Try to understand, you’re part of his great plan.
He’s closer than you know.
Reach up, He’ll take you’re hand.”

Then and Now

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly a politician's mind might change with the political climate. In 2004 (only 5 years ago!), Mitt Romney (a republican) was the governor of Massachusetts. If you know anything about the politics of that state, you know that having a conservative leader is somewhat of a miracle in and of itself. Naturally, the state legislature was, and is, controlled by Democrats. At the time, John Kerry was was running for president. The legislature recognized that, if he was elected, the Republican governor would have the power to appoint his successor. So, they declared the practice of allowing the governor to appoint a senator "undemocratic" and pushed through legislation requiring a special election to determine the new senator.

Well, we all know what happened.

Skip ahead 5 years. It's now 2009 and Senator Kennedy has just passed away. This is an important political issue in a climate where Democrats have declared that they will force through their power-grabbing agenda with or without bi-partisan support. Let's face it, there isn't much chance of Massachusetts electing a conservative. Only 13% of registered voters are Republicans. But, that's not good enough for the Democrats. They don't want to depend on the people to elect the correct candidate any more. You see, the current governor is a Democrat. The very same people who had called allowing the governor to appoint a successor "undemocratic" are now pushing hard for the new senator to simply be appointed before the special election can take place.

Ironically, Senator Kennedy was among the big supporters of the special election in 2004. But more recently, perhaps sensing his own mortality (brain cancer will do that to you), the late senator wrote a letter to state legislators asking them to change the policy so that the governor had the power to appoint.

Isn't it interesting how little faith these people have in their own constituents? Perhaps they all, like Bill Mayer (see yesterday's post) think Americans are stupid.

So...anyone want to move to Massachusetts?

Freedom is the Mother of all Invention

Over and over again, we've been told that conservative values are heartless because they don't believe in the welfare state. I hope I've communicated the truth. We believe in people. We believe that people are amazing, intelligent and capable of ruling their own lives. That is why we value freedom. We do not believe that there should be an elite ruling us. We believe in people. Yesterday, Bill Mayer said this on Conan O'Brian:

"But yeah, I mean, they are talking about 60 votes. Forget this stuff, 60. We can't get Americans to agree on anything 60%. 60% of people don't believe in evolution in this country. He just needs to drag them to it. Like I just said, they're stupid. Just drag them to this. Get healthcare done."

I can laugh at that. What I cannot laugh at is the response Americans were giving this clip on youtube.

"Obama is absolutely right in ignoring the polls. A president of a grown up society has been elected TO DO WHAT PEOPLE NEED NOT WHAT PEOPLE WANT."

"most of the people in any country are idiots, and that's especially true for america."

There were others, but I won't indulge them further. Here's my point: I was taught as a young woman that being a liberal meant caring about other people. I have grown up now and realize that what it actually means is believing you're better than other people and they need you to take care of them.

Here's the truth...Human beings are capable of anything. It is only the perceived shortcomings pushed upon us by liberals that limit our possibilities. Don't buy into the lie that people are stupid, or otherwise incapable.The greatest discoveries in history have come recently. Why have we progressed at break-neck speeds in the last century? FREEDOM. It's as simple as that. Let the people make their own decisions and they will astound you.

SPAM

I’m back! I have to admit that I’ve been less than stalwart in my keeping up with the news during the last couple months. In my defense, I did spend three days in a car with just my kids (6, 5, 3 & 1) and a lot of children’s value-based audiobooks. My brain is a little squishy, but I have a renewed passion for dependability, service and cleanliness.

That being the case, I hope you’ll forgive me for being a little out-of-the-loop. Also, that being the case, returning to my daily news ritual made me giggle rather than grit my teeth this morning. This entire article should be read with a laugh track in the background.

Last week, when we were still visiting relatives, my dad had the news on. The reporter was talking about the phenomenon of people who had not signed up for e-mail correspondence from the White House, receiving unsolicited propaganda about Obamacare…from the White House. Now, I honestly don’t care. I get e-mail from royalty in Nigeria all the time and I simply delete it. I thought the whole news report was a bit of a non-issue.

Until…The reporter pointed out that the President and his staff were baffled by the whole thing. They explained to the reporters asking about the e-mails, that they believed there must be a mysterious “third-party” who is signing innocent people up for White House slop. But, naturally, no one in the administration was involved.

My Dad and I laughed and laughed.

I forgot about the whole scandalous affair until today. Today, the White House confirmed that it had, in-fact, hired a private company (with tax-payer money) to distribute the e-mails. (excuse me while I regain control of my giggles)

Seriously? Well, I guess when you are throwing around money you don’t have the way this administration loves to, it’s worth a few million to try to convince people to spend a lot more. Heck, it’s worth a few million to take a dashing photo of the President so that we all feel more confident in the beauty of the man dragging us down this disgusting path.

A few million? I forgot to mention…No one in the White House knows how much of your money they spent to send you SPAM.

Honest mistake.

Admit it, you’re glad I’m back!

Merci

I haven't been writing much lately because I have been out of town. Rest assured that my passion is not waning with discouragement. I had an experience today, however, that I want to take the time to share before the feelings wear off.

I am visiting my husband in Phoenix. He is doing a rotation at a hospital here and my mother-in-law was kind enough to take our children so I could spend a couple days with him. Unfortunately, he only gets one day in seven off, so I had the opportunity to explore a little bit today while he was working.

At the back of the State Capital building, the State of Arizona maintains a historical museum. I was privileged to spend a few hours learning about the history of this state. I enjoyed the exhibit on the USS Arizona very much. They have the silver service on display. Apparently it was used during peace time when the battleship was a floating embassy. It was removed in preparation for the war, however, so it didn't suffer the fate of the ship, itself. There was a plaque on the wall explaining that the governor didn't think it was appropriate to spend taxpayer money on providing the $9000 silver service, so it was privately funded. How the world has changed.

But the thing that really moved me was the exhibit on the "Merci Train." It was a story I handn't heard before and one that I want to share...

I entered a room full of antiques that seemed to have nothing in common. There was a statue that depicted the virgin Mary and the Christ child. There was an old bicycle on the wall and a wedding dress in a case. There were smaller things: a doll and a toy car. Anxious to discover the room's meaning, I turned to the wall plaques and began to read. In 1948 American journalists began writing about the plight of the people of Europe. Millions were starving in the aftermath of World War II. It was suggested and echoed that American's ought to began collecting food to send across the Atlantic. The goal was to fill 80 boxcars of food. Before the effort was over, people had collected over 700 boxcars of food, fuel and clothing. These were not organizations and certainly not the government. These were individuals who wanted to help. The "friendship train" certainly fed a few tummies, but it also extended love in a world that desperately needed to recover from the most disgusting hate that man can imagine.

In response, the French people gathered 49 boxcars to send back. Called the "Merci Train," the boxcars were loaded with heirlooms, handmade crafts, and reminders of past friendships between France and America. French children donated their toys. French craftsmen sent the best they had to offer. Each state received a boxcar in thanks for the food that had been collected and sent.

I must have looked silly standing there in that museum with tears streaking the sides of my face. I felt completely overwhelmed. Some of you may remember the article I wrote on the study that concluded that Christian nations were the least generous. If not, read it here. My mind tried to wrap itself again around the accusation that Americans are not willing to give. I stood in that museum seeing what freedom does for people. It truly brings out the best in us. I was overwhelmed by the beauty of the objects so selflessly given by the French and wanted to cry over the disgusting sense of entitlement that is gripping our country.

My friends, we do not need someone forcing us to be charitable. We do not need someone telling us what to do. I believe that people are good. And I believe that freedom is what brings that good out. Have a little faith, rather than a lot of force. People will amaze you.

From The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

This article was taken from here http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=22133&cpg=1. They took it from someone else. I hope no one minds :)

It's a good read.

AMA HAS SOLD OUT PATIENTS & THE PROFESSION FOR A FEW BUCKS

Washington DC -- The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons issued the following statement from Kathryn Serkes, Director of Policy and Public Affairs, in response to the AMA's endorsement of House Bill 3200:

"The American Medical Association has sold out patients and the profession by endorsing House bill that supports government medicine.

"Why did the AMA do it? For a few dollars increase in Medicare reimbursement rates. In effect, it's told patients, 'It's about the money, stupid.'

"We don't think that a miniscule raise - one that can be revoked at any time on Congressional whim - is worth selling out for government control of medicine. The AMA has sold patient choice, patient privacy and patient control to the highest bidder.

"The AMA had the unbridled nerve to stand up with the President and pledge to reduce costs - on the very day that it sent out an alert to its members urging them to contact Congress in support of a physician pay raise.

"The AMA is trying to paint any doctors who oppose them as being 'anti-reform,' but that's not true. Our doctors are for reform - real reform that puts patients and doctors in control, not the government.

"The AMA is not alone. Organized medicine has been spineless. Today a surgeon from Arkansas told me that he is appalled that the American College of Surgeons sent him an email saying, in effect, that they wanted a seat at the table, and were willing to endorse the bill if that's what it took to get that seat

"Today we've heard comments like: 'The AMA is a disgrace.' 'All physicians who care for patients should drop out of the AMA immediately.' '...has a track record of toadying up to government in exchange for handouts to its cronies that, in turn, are extorted from us as taxpayers and as honestly working physicians.'

"Thousands of doctors are joining the 'Dump the AMA' bandwagon. Signatures are pouring in to the 'Take Back Medicine' petition to Congress and the President. (See www.TakeBackMedicine.com) These are the doctors who really care about their patients."

Redefining Civilization

Two and a half years ago, a 66-year-old Spanish woman (Carmen Bousada) gave birth to twin boys after fertility treatment. She became the world's oldest mother, justifying her actions by saying that her mother lived to 101 and that "we live in a civilized society" so she was not concerned about what would become of her sons if she died. Now, she's dead and the boys are orphaned. Despite the fact that she promised to "look for a younger man" to help her raise them, it is unclear who will take the children.

Why am it writing about this?

I believe it is a symptom of a much larger problem. I believe it is analogous of what is happening to our society and infecting our children. We live in a civilized society; that was her justification for making a selfish decision that abandoned any sense of personal responsibility. How long has the concept of civilization meant an end to moral accountability? How long have people been sliding toward the idea that because we are rational beings who are a part of a society, we should not have to be individual beings who work hard and depend on ourselves for self-sufficiency? I am saddened to see that civilization is destroying personal responsibility, but it is permeating ever facet of our political system.