http://news.yahoo.com/…

First you paid to insure your car. Soon you may have to add health insurance premiums to that stack of monthly bills as well.

In a revamped health care system envisioned by senators, people would be required to carry health insurance just like motorists must get auto coverage now. The government would provide subsidies for the poor and many middle-class families, but those who still refuse to sign up would face fines of more than $1,000.

The details were unveiled Thursday in a health care overhaul bill supported by key Senate Democrats looking to fulfill President Barack Obama’s top domestic priority.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated the fines would raise around $36 billion over 10 years. Senate aides said the penalties would be modeled on the approach taken by Massachusetts, which now imposes a fine of about $1,000 a year on individuals who refuse to get coverage. Under the federal legislation, families would pay higher penalties than individuals.

Called “shared responsibility payments,” the fines would offset at least half the cost of basic medical coverage, according to the legislation. The goal is to nudge people to sign up for coverage when they are healthy, not wait until they get sick.

In 2008, employer-provided coverage averaged $12,680 a year for a family plan, and $4,704 for individual coverage, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s annual survey. Senate aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said the cost of the federal plan would be lower but declined to provide specifics.

The legislation would exempt certain hardship cases from fines, which would be collected through the income tax system.

Tying it into the income tax is really really sneaky. It makes it very difficult to protest against. If the federal government wanted to fine me for not participating in the census they’d have to bring me to court. If this bill is passed the IRS handles the fine. It’s tied into your income taxes. If you don’t pay you don’t go to a normal court… but likely a tax court. You won’t be able to seperate the fine from the rest of their bill. It makes it easier for them to catch and easier to collect.

If they passed a bill requiring healthcare without this IRS enforcement of the fine I would seriously consider canceling my health insurance just to incure a fine and test the system. If it passes as currently is however only those who don’t pay income tax could really get out of this demand and if they ever got caught the fine would be the least of their problems.

Love how they talk about how much the fines will make them too. Scumbags.

Well I finally finishing Healing Our World in an Age of Aggression by Dr. Mary Ruwart.  Incidentally you can find an older version of this text for free online.  You have to give this book a lot of credit for being well organized.  There is a full index in the back as well as an appendix of citations.  Each chapter is broken into small sections with a one page chapter summary at the end.  In that respect, it kind of reads like a textbook.  I know I’ll use it in the future if I need to look up information on a particular topic.  The book also deserves credit for covering everything.  I mean that in the Cleveland quoting Peter Griffin, “Eeeeeevvvverythaaaang” sense.  I’ve never seen a libertarian book do such a good job of covering so many topics in three hundred some pages.

Most importantly it is writen from a compassionate perspective, which has caused me to by a few extra copies for my friends and parents.  No vulgar libertarianism here, just genuine concern for other people.  Dr. Ruwart cites numerous examples of how aggression hurts everyone, from the playground all the way up to wallstreet.  The language is simple, direct and quotes are included in the margins pertaining to the topics being addressed.

Now, this review isn’t just going to be a Ruwart love-fest.  There are a few things wrong with the book as well.  Let’s start with the most readily apparent, the cover.  It’s terrible and it’s turned a decent amount of people off from the book.  People I recommend the book to look at me like, “You want me to read that?  With the twin towers and the dove?”  I’ve considered putting a brown paper bag dust cover on it before I give it to people.  As much as it goes against conventional wisdom, people do judge a book by its cover.  I’m sure this book’s cover has hurt its sales.

As I stated earlier, it reads like a textbook.  Textbooks are usually packed with information, but not particularly engaging.  I could knock this book for not grabbing the reader, but I don’t really think that’s what it’s about.  I’d recommend that people read it slowly and pick topics they are already interested in to research.  Treat it like a textbook and it will serve you well.  Just don’t go thinking that it’s going to be riveting.

So to sum things up, I’d say this is a book you definitely have to own.  In time you’ll probably read all of it.  You may disagree with parts and you may find yourself quoting other parts.  It’s very well researched and organized so you’ll probably use it as a reference.

Is he really that blind to miss that all those bad ideas Bush had… Obama is expanding upon? That he’s in bed with the corporations just as Bush was… if not moreso.

Perhaps there needs to be a campaign to mail copies of Tom Wood’s Meltdown to everyone in the media.

Just now Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius was on CNN talking about the Obama administrations healthcare proposals. The host asks if all these programs Obama is promoting are sustainable or even appropriate given the 1.5 trillion dollar deficit the federal government is running this year and is planned to continue doing in the next few. “Isn’t that partly how we got into the current crisis? Couldn’t this continued behavior lead the country to bankruptcy?”

Her reply:

“No, I think it’s just the opposite.” … and then goes on to describe that prices in healthcare are too much and everyone knows it and the government needs to step in and help out.

Deficits will do the opposite of leading them toward bankruptcy? So spending money we don’t have makes us wealthy?! Federal government spending money is magicly not from taxes you’ve already paid or will pay or your children will pay some day or will pay through inflation?

flucheck6web.pdf

At least they are discussing it (sortof) rather than just doing it. There is no doubt however that they would gladly follow through with such infringements. For your own good of course.

1.5 Legal and ethical issues

1.5.1 Legal issues

Rationale
During a pandemic, it may be necessary to overrule existing legislation or (individual) human rights. Examples are the enforcement of quarantine (overruling individual freedom of movement), use of privately owned buildings for hospitals, off-license use of drugs, compulsory vaccination or implementation of emergency shifts in essential services. These decisions need a legal framework to ensure transparent assessment and justification of the measures that are being considered, and to ensure coherence with international legislation (International Health Regulations).

Questions to be addressed
Is there a legislative framework in place for the national response plan? Does this framework include contingencies for health-care delivery and maintenance of essential services, and for public health measures to be implemented?
Legal issues that are highlighted in other parts of the checklist are brought together as a separate checklist here. Other issues are added.

Check

• Identify the advantages and disadvantages of declaring a state of emergency during a pandemic.
• Each jurisdiction needs to assess the legal basis of all public health measures that are likely to be proposed, including:
  • travel or movement restrictions (leaving and entering areas where infection is established);
  • closure of educational institutions;
  • prohibition of mass gatherings;
  • isolation or quarantine of infected persons, or of persons suspected of being infected, or persons from areas where pandemic strain influenza infection is established.
• Assess standing policy on, and legal basis for, influenza vaccination of health-care workers, workers in essential services (see sections 5.1 and 5.2) or persons at high risk. Decide if this policy needs refinement to increase uptake during pandemic alert and pandemic periods. Consider the use of both seasonal and pandemic vaccine for these groups.
• Address liability, insurance and temporary licensing issues for retired health-care workers and volunteers who may be working in areas outside their training and competence in health and emergency services.
• Consider liability for unforeseen adverse events attributed to vaccine and/or antiviral drug use, especially where the licensing process for a pandemic strain vaccine has been expedited. Liability issues may affect vaccine manufacturers, the licensing authority and those who administer the vaccine.
• Ensure a legislative framework for compliance with the International Health Regulations.
• Consider including influenza or pandemic influenza in national legislation for the prevention of occupational diseases.

1.5.2 Ethical issues

Rationale
Ethical issues are closely related to legal issues as mentioned above. They are part of the normative framework that is needed to assess the cultural acceptability of measures such as quarantine or selective vaccination of predefined risk groups.

Questions to be addressed
Have ethical aspects of policy decisions been considered? Is there a leading ethical framework that can be used during the response to an outbreak to balance individual and population rights?

• Consider ethical questions related to limiting the availability of a scarce resource, such as rationed diagnostic laboratory testing, pandemic strain influenza vaccine or antiviral drugs.
• Consider ethical questions related to compulsory vaccination for healthcare workers and workers from essential services.
• Consider the ethical issues related to limiting personal freedom, such as may occur with isolation and quarantine.
• Ensure the establishment of an ethical framework for research, especially when this involves human subjects.