Debt ceilings & runaway spending

 

Betsy McCaughey often updates her readers on healthcare matters.  Yesterday, at Townhall, she analyzed the consequences of Congress members who want to keep raising the debt ceiling.  Her premise:

"If America wants to spend like Europe, it must tax like Europe -- and that means large payroll and value-added taxes on the middle class," says [Manhattan Institute economist Brian] Riedl.

Ms. McCaughey concludes:

Over the last 25 years, Congress has hammered out eight laws to control spending. All eight were tied to debt ceiling hikes.

At stake in this current debt ceiling struggle is preserving what sets the United States apart from Europe.

In the United States, working people get to keep most of what they earn and decide how to spend it.

Don't let the Washington pols treat your paycheck as if it belongs to them.

The full column is here.  This might be one issue that might get better results in any upcoming vote --  with a call to your House representative; click here. 

# # #

Betsy McCaughey: Build Back Broke

 

Betsy McCaughey was a go-to resource when Congress was preparing to ram Obamacare down our throats.  Today in the New York Post, she gets into the weeds with the bazillion dollar Build Back Better bill:

Democrats are quarreling over the price tag of their Build Back Better bill. But the real problem is what’s in it. The bill coerces workers to join unions, imposes racial preferences on every facet of life and redistributes money from workers to takers.

Fortunately, the bill is in limbo. Moderate Democrats like Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va) insist the bill has to be pared down to less than half its current price tag. The far left is outraged. But the bill can’t pass without every Senate Democrat supporting it.

Not passing it would be best: This bill is as un-American as it gets. Here are some of its details, which Democrats would prefer you not see. Judge for yourself.

Here are the bullet points:

• First-generation down-payment assistance: Most people work and save for years to buy a home. This bill makes them into suckers. It gives $6.8 billion to low-income first-time homebuyers with no conditions. It’s part of President Biden’s scheme to increase racial and economic diversity in the suburbs.
• Home-efficiency rebates: The bill offers up to $14,000 to homeowners who lower energy use by installing new heat pumps, air conditioning systems, insulation and energy-efficient appliances. It’s a pot of gold for homeowners who qualify and tens of billions of dollars in new business for [union] contractors.
• Direct-care workforce: The bill awards $1.48 billion to labor unions and community organizations to recruit and train workers to care for the elderly or disabled at home. Top priority is training workers in their rights and organizing them. This is your tax dollars at work creating a new army of likely Democratic voters.

Click here for the rest of the column.  None of it is good news.

# # #

Four Health Care Whoppers

Betsy McCaughey's analysis of Democrat candidates' proposed healthcare "plans" is at Real Clear Politics:

When it comes to health care, Democrats are selling snake oil. Americans are grappling with rising medical costs. But if they fall for the phony solutions the left is offering, they'll pay with exorbitant taxes and shorter lives.

Whopper 1: Obamacare is affordable. Joe Biden's running a television ad in Iowa pledging to stand by Obamacare because "every American deserves affordable health care." Iowans aren't going to buy that. They're not hayseeds.

Truth: In Iowa, 90% of Obamacare customers who paid their own way in 2014 have dropped their coverage. Obamacare is affordable only if you qualify for a subsidy. Middle-class people who earn too much to get taxpayer-funded help can't afford to stay enrolled. They "have taken it on the chin," reports Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation. Why is the number of uninsured in America suddenly rising again? Blame Obamacare for pricing the middle class out of insurance.

. . .

Pols are scapegoating drug companies and insurance companies. Here's what they're not telling you: Medical costs in the United States are rising just as fast in other developed countries. Major culprits are the obesity epidemic and inactive lifestyles, not America's capitalist health system.

Health costs are a top issue in the 2020 election, and every candidate has a "plan." These plans are mere shell games, shifting the costs from one group of people to another. No one wins but the pols.

For all 4 Whoppers, click here.

# # #

Medicare is going broke

image credit: nextavenue.org

Betsy McCaughey has been one of the most informed critics of healthcare policy ever since Obamacare reared its ugly head. Her latest column at American Spectator sounds the alarm over Medicare Part A and the Democrat candidates’ promises of Medicare For All (titled "Democrats To Seniors: Drop Dead”):

Medicare is going broke,
and the Dems’ presidential candidates couldn’t care less

Baby boomers beware. If you’re in your 50s or 60s and you’re counting on Medicare to pay your future hospital bills, you’re in for a shock. Medicare Part A — the fund that pays hospitals and nursing homes — is running out of money. A mere seven years from now, it will no longer have enough to pay your providers’ bills in full. 

The Medicare Trustees sounded the alarm in June, urging Congress to act “as soon as possible” to protect people “already dependent” on the program.

Good advice, but don’t expect most politicians to take it. The Democrats running for president are in fantasy land, proposing to expand Medicare to millions of younger people or even to the entire population through “Medicare for All.” Never mind Medicare’s insolvency. That’s like a family that can’t pay its mortgage out shopping for a mega-mansion.

. . .

Currently, Trump is using his only option. He’s reducing benefit costs. Any other remedy would require Congress’ cooperation, which is unlikely.

Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and other backers of Medicare for All are making big promises with no way to pay. 

Read the rest here.

# # #

The Medicare-for-All Hoax

photo credit: magnoliabox.com

Cleveland Tea Party was one of many liberty groups and organizations that fought hard to prevent Obamacare from becoming law. We prepared and participated in delegations that visited offices of our representatives, made phone calls, organized rallies, etc. The GOP members of Congress have still not made good on their campaign promises (years of promises) to repeal Obamacare -- and now we are looking at yet another destructive proposal from the Democrat Party to take another wrecking ball to Americans’ access to their healthcare plan of choice.

Two days ago, President Trump published his op-ed and call-to-arms to stop the “Medicare For All” madness in USA Today. The mainstream media pounced on it, reproducing big chunks of it on their websites, so I decided to paste Trump's entire columns below (skip to the end if you’ve already read it to see links to the counter-counter arguments):

The Democrats want to outlaw private health care plans, taking away freedom to choose plans while letting anyone cross our border. We must win this.

Throughout the year, we have seen Democrats across the country uniting around a new legislative proposal that would end Medicare as we know it and take away benefits that seniors have paid for their entire lives.

Dishonestly called “Medicare for All,” the Democratic proposal would establish a government-run, single-payer health care system that eliminates all private and employer-based health care plans and would cost an astonishing

$32.6 trillion during its first 10 years. 

As a candidate, I promised that we would protect coverage for patients with pre-existing conditions and create new health care insurance options that would lower premiums. I have kept that promise, and we are now seeing health insurance premiums coming down.

I also made a solemn promise to our great seniors to protect Medicare. That is why I am fighting so hard against the Democrats' plan that would eviscerate Medicare. Democrats have already harmed seniors by slashing Medicare by more than $800 billion over 10 years to pay for Obamacare. Likewise, Democrats would gut Medicare with their planned government takeover of American health care.

The Democrats' plan threatens America's seniors

The Democrats' plan means that after a life of hard work and sacrifice, seniors would no longer be able to depend on the benefits they were promised. By eliminating Medicare as a program for seniors, and outlawing the ability of Americans to enroll in private and employer-based plans, the Democratic plan would inevitably lead to the massive rationing of health care. Doctors and hospitals would be put out of business. Seniors would lose access to their favorite doctors. There would be long wait lines for appointments and procedures. Previously covered care would effectively be denied.

In practice, the Democratic Party’s so-called Medicare for All would really be Medicare for None. Under the Democrats' plan, today’s Medicare would be forced to die.

The Democrats' plan also would mean the end of choice for seniors over their own health care decisions. Instead, Democrats would give total power and control over seniors’ health care decisions to the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.

The first thing the Democratic plan will do to end choice for seniors is eliminate Medicare Advantage plans for about 20 million seniors as well as eliminate other private health plans that seniors currently use to supplement their Medicare coverage.

Next, the Democrats would eliminate every American’s private and employer-based health plan. It is right there in their proposed legislation: Democrats outlaw private health plans that offer the same benefits as the government plan. 

Americans might think that such an extreme, anti-senior, anti-choice and anti-consumer proposal for government-run health care would find little support among Democrats in Congress.

Unfortunately, they would be wrong: 123 Democrats in the House of Representatives — 64 percent of House Democrats — as well as 15 Democrats in the Senate have already formally co-sponsored this legislation. Democratic nominees for governor in Florida, California and Maryland are all campaigning in support of it, as are many Democratic congressional candidates.

Democrats want open-borders socialism

The truth is that the centrist Democratic Party is dead. The new Democrats are radical socialists who want to model America’s economy after Venezuela.

If Democrats win control of Congress this November, we will come dangerously closer to socialism in America. Government-run health care is just the beginning. 

Democrats are also pushing massive government control of education, private-sector businesses and other major sectors of the U.S. economy. 

Every single citizen will be harmed by such a radical shift in American culture and life. Virtually everywhere it has been tried, socialism has brought suffering, misery and decay.

Indeed, the Democrats' commitment to government-run health care is all the more menacing to our seniors and our economy when paired with some Democrats' absolute commitment to end enforcement of our immigration laws by abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That means millions more would cross our borders illegally and take advantage of health care paid for by American taxpayers.

Today’s Democratic Party is for open-borders socialism. This radical agenda would destroy American prosperity. Under its vision, costs will spiral out of control. Taxes will skyrocket. And Democrats will seek to slash budgets for seniors’ Medicare, Social Security and defense.

Republicans believe that a Medicare program that was created for seniors and paid for by seniors their entire lives should always be protected and preserved. I am committed to resolutely defending Medicare and Social Security from the radical socialist plans of the Democrats. For the sake of our country, our prosperity, our seniors and all Americans — this is a fight we must win.

Donald J. Trump is the president of the United States. Follow him on Twitter: @realDonaldTrump

The “fight we must win” means winning votes on November 6 for candidates opposed to “Medicare For All.” (The bill and related sites are here).

As soon as our President’s op-ed was published, the mainstream media leaped into action to point out all the inaccuracies and false information in his op-ed. Among them were NPR, LA Times, and Chicago Tribune. For example, the LA Times slammed the piece with “Trump's USA Today op-ed on Medicare is full of lies — and USA Today should not have published it.” Hmm. It was apparent just scrolling through the search results that these articles were in the same echo chamber in their mission to discredit Trump’s op-ed.

So I searched for Betsy McCaughey, who was my go-to resource when attempting to decipher the Obamacare legislation. Sure enough, she was on the job at Townhall last month. Here’s her take titled “The Medicare-for-All Hoax.” I’ll go with her and President Trump’s analysis over NPR's and the LA Times' any day of the week.

# # #

Good news on Health Care

 photo credit: Legal Insurrection

Despite the GOP winning majorities in both the House and Senate, and then winning the White House, the pathetic GOPe in Congress have utterly failed to deliver on its promise to repeal the misnamed “Affordable Care Act.” The bill to repeal should have been on the President’s desk on Day 1, but the GOP, it would seem, never dreamed they’d have to make good on the promise.

Now President Trump has signed a few Executive Orders to begin to dismantle the monstrosity known as Obamacare, and Betsy McCaughey reports on what that means:

Trump strikes a blow 

for health care freedom

Free at last! That’s the message for millions who don’t get health coverage at work and, until now, faced two dismal options: going without insurance or paying Obama­Care’s soaring premiums. On Thursday, President Trump announced changes that will allow consumers to choose coverage options costing half of what ObamaCare’s cheapest bronze plans cost.

Democrats are already accusing the president of kneecapping ObamaCare, but these changes will reduce the number of uninsured — something Democrats claim is their goal.

The Affordable Care Act requires everyone to buy the one-size-fits-all package. You have to pay for maternity care, even if you’re too old to give birth. You’re also on the hook for pediatric dental care, even if you’re childless. It’s like passing a law that the only car you can buy is a fully-loaded, four-door sedan. No more hatchbacks or two-seaters.

Trump’s taking the opposite approach, allowing consumers choice. His new regulation will free people to again buy “short-term” health plans that exclude many costly services, such as inpatient drug rehab. These plans aren’t guaranteed to be renewable year to year; the upside is they cost much less.

. . .

. . . Trump has now seized the initiative, after congressional Republicans fell flat on their faces and failed to address the pain ObamaCare is inflicting on consumers stuck in the individual insurance market.

The president should keep going. What’s next? Trump should use his discretion to stop enforcing the tax penalty on those who don’t buy ObamaCare-compliant plans, including buyers of short-term plans.

Then he should cancel the sweetheart deal his predecessor weaseled for members of Congress and their staff members. Even though the Affordable Care Act requires them to buy coverage on ObamaCare exchanges, Obama arranged for them to have a choice of 57 gold plans and have John Q. Public pick up most of their costs. It’s an outrage.

Once members of Congress are feeling the same pain as everyone else, they’ll be more focused on repealing and replacing the dysfunctional health law. In the meantime, Trump is wisely providing relief where it counts the most — in people’s wallets.

Read the rest here.

# # #

Hillary’s track record as Secretary of State

photo credit: businessinsider.com

Betsy McCaughey contributed a post-debate essay today to The American Spectator website. The article, “Failure at Foggy Bottom,” examines Hillary’s track record running the Dept. of State:

Hillary Clinton boasts that her experience traveling to 112 countries as secretary of state qualifies her to be president. Don’t believe it.

At the end of her taxpayer-funded audition on the world stage, she came home empty-handed, with no meaningful gains for the United States. Voters are too smart to be wowed when she rattles off names of Islamic terrorist splinter factions and third-world capitals.

Evidence shows she left the State Department in shambles and our nation weaker. If anything, her record at Foggy Bottom should disqualify her to be president.

. . .

This presidential race is a contest between a builder and a blabberer. The builder, Donald Trump, manages 185 major business ventures around the globe. Until 2009, Clinton had never run anything. Running the State Department was her chance to prove she could do it. She failed miserably.

Read the chapter and verse here.

# # #

Trump and Clinton on the economy and jobs

art credit: politichicks.com 

Betsy McCaughey is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research. Tea party and liberty groups will recognize her name from her ongoing analyses, from the beginning, of Obamacare. Many in those groups are not happy that Trump is the presumptive candidate. Some of the dissatisfaction stems from the perception that Trump is not a true conservative at heart, that’s he’s an egomaniac and braggart, and so on. In yesterday’s column in The New York Post, McCaughey looks at the economic prospects under either a Clinton or a Trump presidency.

President Obama’s top banker Janet Yellen gave a somber assessment of the current job market this week, throwing cold water on the president’s election-year message that voters should elect a Democrat to the White House again.

Obama’s been bragging that America has “the strongest” economy in the world. And pigs can fly.

Growth under Obama has averaged a stagnant 1.7 percent a year. Meanwhile, Ireland is growing at nearly 8 percent, India at 7 percent, Sweden at 4 percent.

The Obama economy is embarrassing compared to those countries — and compared to what Americans enjoyed for decades. It’s “the worst economic-growth record of any president” since the Great Depression, says Stanford economist Michael Boskin.

Last week’s economic reports were bad news for job seekers. Growth dipped below 1 percent in the first quarter, and full-time employment actually shrank in May.

We can’t let Obama-stagnation become the new normal. It’s driving Americans to self-destruction. Deaths from alcoholism, drug addiction, cirrhosis of the liver and suicides — what Princeton University researcher Anne Case calls “deaths of despair” — have soared.

These tragedies raise the stakes in this presidential election. Who’s equipped to jump-start America’s economy, Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump?

Spoiler alert: It’s not Hillary. She makes her money giving speeches and promoting books about herself.

Of course, Trump is no slouch when it comes to self-promotion. But he’s made a fortune actually building businesses. Trump runs an impressive 185 income-producing ventures, all listed on his 104-page Financial Disclosure Statement. (Hillary’s is only 11 pages.)

The mogul has built office buildings, apartment buildings, golf resorts and other ventures worldwide. He builds things and creates jobs. He also rakes in hefty fees managing properties worldwide, because their owners are confident he’s effective.

People like Trump, who run businesses themselves, understand why our economy is stuck in low gear. High taxes and suffocating, costly regulations are turning off investors. As economist Larry Kudlow explains, investment — in computers, factory buildings, equipment, trucks — is declining, indicating slow job growth ahead. A business that can’t buy more trucks can’t hire more drivers.

To boost investment, Trump calls for lowering taxes on businesses to 15 percent — less than half the nominal rate now — and reducing regulation. Obama calls Trump’s tax policies “crazy.” But if you want to see crazy, take a look at Hillary’s proposals.

She calls her plan “fair growth.” The phrase should strike terror into the heart of any business owner. It means more gender and racial preferences in hiring, more government rules on how employees are paid, and tax hikes to push companies into what she calls “far-sighted investments.” Yikes, Uncle Sam will be taking a seat in boardrooms and looking over managers’ shoulders.

That will discourage investment. Weak investment is already to blame for the hiring slowdown, points out economist David Malpass. Overall, the economy lost 59,000 full-time jobs, gaining only in part-time spots.

America is becoming a nation of part-timers. The average work week has shrunk to 34 hours — not enough to support a family.

Hillary wouldn’t know. She pulls in $250,000 for an hour at the podium, and sometimes racks up two speaking fees a day. Nice work if you can get it. Who needs full-time?

Hillary earns her money blabbing, while Trump earns his building.

Clinton is assailing Trump for not releasing his tax returns. Face it, most politicians willingly release their returns because there isn’t much to see. (Like speaking fees.) Whereas a builder’s return reveals how he makes money — suppliers, labor, depreciation and everything else.

Now Washington pols are pushing a bill authorizing the IRS to release the returns of any presidential candidate who doesn’t disclose voluntarily. Who would want the IRS to have that power?

The real issue isn’t Trump’s taxable income, but what the rest of us are able to earn. Americans need more take-home pay. The prospects look better with a builder in the White House than with a blabber.

# # #

Ebola Quarantines

Art credit: littlebigplanet.wikia.com

Ohioans had a scare recently when a nurse with the Ebola virus flew in and out of Hopkins Airport. Were Ohioans' fears justified or unwarranted? Betsy McCaughey is an excellent resource on healthcare, including Obamacare and the Ebola virus. Here’s her column from National Review online:

OCTOBER 31, 2014 6:18 PM

The Evidence Demands Ebola Quarantines

We can applaud health workers and take the prudent steps at the same time.

By Betsy McCaughey

President Barack Obama and Kaci Hickox, a nurse who returned from treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone on October 24, are attacking states’ efforts to keep returning health-care workers away from the public for 21 days. Governors in New Jersey, Illinois, Maine, Connecticut, and other states say it’s a wise precaution to prevent the virus from possibly spreading. But Obama claims that these regulations are based on fear, not science. And Hickox has successfully defied Maine’s effort to restrict her to her home, bashing the quarantine as “unnecessary” and “not evidence-based.” Judge Charles C. LaVerdiere ruled on Friday that Hickox is free to travel without restrictions.

But, in fact, science is against Obama, Hickox, and the judge. Evidence shows that to protect the public, travelers from Ebola-plagued West Africa, especially doctors and nurses who battled the virus, should be quarantined for 21 days.

Fever Monitoring Is Unreliable

At least 100 people, including about five health-care workers, enter the U.S. each day from Ebola-infected countries in West Africa. At departure from there and arrival here, their temperatures are checked by airport workers. But data from over 4,000 Ebola cases (the most complete analysis ever) published October 16 in the New England Journal of Medicine show that 13 percent of patients don’t develop a fever early on.

Thomas Duncan, who brought Ebola to Texas and infected two nurses, was able to get through fever screening. It also failed to identify Craig Spencer, the physician with Doctors without Borders, who returned home to New York infected with Ebola and then went bowling, dined out, and took the subway. Now he is fighting for his life in Bellevue Hospital, and public-health officials are scrambling to identify the people who may have been exposed to him.

Spiking temperatures eventually alerted Duncan and Spencer. But the research shows that in 13 percent of Ebola cases, the patient is already quite ill and diagnosed with the virus but still does not have a fever.

Are Americans At Risk Of Catching Ebola?

For most Americans, the known risk of catching Ebola is currently small. Ebola is most contagious in the later stages of illness, when victims here presumably would be in a hospital, putting hospital workers at severe risk but not the rest of us. Better sanitation facilities here than in Africa make it less likely that Americans will be exposed to infectious bodily fluids.

Less likely, that is, but not impossible. An infected person’s saliva can contain numerous virus particles. When scientists say Ebola is not “airborne,” they mean the virus doesn’t remain suspended in the air after the infected person leaves the area. But Ebola might be contagious if the infected person coughs or sneezes, sending droplets several feet. If droplets land in one’s eye, nose, or mouth or on a cut or opening in your skin, it’s possible to get Ebola. On October 23, the CDC edited its website to include this kind of transmission. Sharing finger food from a common plate with someone infected with Ebola also could put you at risk, according to research in the Journal of Infectious Diseases.

What about touching a subway pole, door knob, or bowling ball? Unlike staph and other bacteria that can last weeks on dry surfaces, viruses last only a few hours, and there is no research confirming transmission that way. A 2007 study in The Journal of Infectious Diseases shows that the virus can survive on objects much longer if it is embedded in blood, for example, a bloody bandage, tampon, or tissue. The CDC also included this information in its October 23 update, only seven years after the research became available. Better late than not at all.

Then there’s the risk of using a toilet right after an Ebola-infected patient has used it and flushed. A bacterial infection common in hospitals, Clostridium difficile, is known to spread that way. Investigators from the University of Illinois School of Public Health make the connection: “Regarding diarrhea, even when contained by toilets, toilet flushing emits a pathogen laden aerosol that disperses in the air.”

These unknowns would humble any scientist confronting a virus that has no cure for the infected and no vaccine to protect the public. But not the Obama administration.

Why Not Just Test For It?

Kaci Hickox tested negative for Ebola shortly after arriving in the U.S. and finding herself detained under Governor Christie’s new 21-day quarantine policy. But Ebola lab tests (both types available) don’t show the virus until the patient develops symptoms, and even then they can give false negatives for a few more days, explains Dr. Sandro Cinti, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Michigan Hospital System.

Don’t Hazmat Suits Keep Workers Safe?

The CDC insists that doctors and nurses working in Africa are not at a high risk of carrying Ebola home because they wear protective gear. Not so fast. The World Health Organization reports that 521 health-care workers have contracted Ebola so far this year and 272 have died. Some had inadequate equipment or training, but the fatalities include many with experience and full protective gear. According to infectious-disease experts at Johns Hopkins, the gear, though helpful, “is simply not enough.” That’s because there is no room for error in removing it once it’s contaminated with vomit, diarrhea, or blood. “The smallest mistake can be fatal,” Peter Piot, a renowned virologist who co-discovered Ebola, has said.

It’s no wonder that Samaritan’s Purse, a relief organization in North Carolina, imposes a 21-day isolation period on workers returning from Ebola-affected countries. Similarly, hospitals require Ebola volunteers to stay out of work for 21 days after their return to the U.S.

Hickox insists she’s healthy. Let’s hope so. But the same New England Journal of Medicine analysis of 4,000 Ebola cases shows that health-care workers are no quicker to identify their own illness and get to a hospital than others.

Stigmatizing Or Honoring?

Hickox objects that Ebola volunteers are being “stigmatized.” President Obama, sounding like the nation’s schoolmarm-in-chief, lectured us on Wednesday that when these volunteers come home “they deserve to be treated properly. They deserve to be treated like the heroes they are.”

They are heroes, including Kaci Hickox. But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be quarantined. On Monday, the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended that all U.S. troops returning from West Africa undergo a 21-day quarantine. They’re heroes too.

There is no stigma to being quarantined: Our heroic astronauts who landed on the moon were quarantined on their return, to be sure they were not carrying unknown pathogens.

Obama is creating a false choice by saying we have to applaud health-care workers instead of quarantining them.

We should do both.

— Betsy McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research.

# # #

Second Ebola patient in TX flew from Cleveland

Photo credit: wolhazmat.de

A second nurse has been diagnosed with the Ebola virus. Bryan Preston at PJ Media reports:

  

DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – The CDC has announced that the second healthcare worker diagnosed with Ebola traveled by air Oct. 13, the day before she first reported symptoms.

The CDC is now reaching out to all passengers who flew on Frontier Airlines flight 1143 Cleveland to Dallas/Fort Worth. The flight landed at 8:16 p.m. CT.

The CDC is asking all 132 passengers on the flight to call 1 800-CDC INFO (1 800 232-4636). Public health professionals will begin interviewing passengers about the flight after 1 p.m. ET.

Fox 8 News has more here.

And it gets scarier. PJ Media again: 

Dr. Betsy McCaughey appeared on Fox just after she had attend a CDC conference call with hospitals this afternoon.

Host Stuart Varney asked her what it would take to set up 50 hospitals to be ready for Ebola.

McCaughey’s answer is stunning.

According to her, after the CDC outlined its preparation strategy, one hospital administrator responded, “What you’re telling us would bankrupt my hospital!” She said that that administrator represents a Southern California hospital.

McCaughey noted that there was no word on the call of who would pay for hospitals to get themselves ready for Ebola patients.

And then she added: “Treating one Ebola patient requires, full time, 20 medical staff. Mostly ICU (intensive care unit) people. So that would wipe out an ICU in an average-sized hospital.”

In the case of Texas Presbyterian, McCaughey says that the hospital cordoned off its ICU to care for Thomas Eric Duncan and sent the rest of its ICU patients to other area hospitals. She added that many communities will not have multiple hospitals to choose from, so one Ebola case could cripple ICUs in small towns.

“But the most important thing,” McCaughey said, “is that doctors and nurses are not ready for the challenge of using this personal protective equipment even if you see them with the helmet, the respirator, the full suits, as the CDC said on the call today, even all that equipment is not enough to guarantee the safety of health care workers because it is so perilous to put it on and particularly to remove it once it’s become contaminated.”

McCaughey said many of those on the call were “daunted by the expectations, the separate laboratory next to the isolated patients, all kinds of — all kinds of adjustments, where to put the waste. Many states won’t even let you dispose of this waste from such a toxic disease.”

# # #

Art credit: amsimaging.com

Betsy McCaughey is a former Lt. Gov. of New York, author, and frequent columnist and TV news guest. In the months preceding the passage of Obamacare in Congress, McCaughey was one of the critical resources for patriots across the country, who relied on her analyses to prepare for visits to their Representatives and Senators, calls to the congressional switchboard, etc. She published another analysis the other day in the New York Post about the latest document dump of ... over 1,200 pages of NEW regulations on Obamacare. Here is her complete article: 

-----------------------------------------

ObamaCare: Death by paperwork 

On July 3, with Americans preparing to celebrate freedom, the Obama administration reduced freedom by adding 1,296 pages of new regulations to ObamaCare.

It was a classic pre-holiday document dump, publishing the mind-numbing rules in the Federal Register on the eve of Independence Day, when few were likely to be watching. So much for transparency.

ObamaCare regulations compel doctors and their office staff, business owners, local officials and virtually everyone else subject to the law to spend hours filling out paperwork with no pay for their labor. It’s a colossal theft.

Now four years old, ObamaCare imposes 159 million hours of paperwork a year on the public. That’s the administration’s own estimate, undoubtedly a lowball.

Even so, it’s up by 48 million hours over last year, when fewer regulations had been rolled out. And there’s more to come.

Among the July 3 rules is one that compels doctors who take Medicare to report 18 different clinical measurements on their patients, such as whether they are overweight and have been counseled about weight control.

Doctors who fail to do it will get whacked with lower payments starting in 2015.

The regulators estimate that this single report could take as long as 108 minutes per patient and consume 5.4 million hours a year nationwide. That’s time that could be spent treating patients or calling them to remind them to take their meds.

Instead, the federal bureaucracy is confiscating those hours to serve its own ends.

Small-business owners get hit hard, too. Notably, restaurateurs face 622,000 hours of work to comply with ObamaCare’s menu-labeling rules.

The American Action Forum, a public-policy organization, notes that ObamaCare is in a class by itself, imposing almost three times as much paperwork as the notoriously complex Dodd-Frank financial regulations, and more than 10 times as much as under the Sarbanes-Oxley financial-reform law.

The Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, is the biggest culprit, responsible for 90 million hours a year of ObamaCare paperwork chores. Most are foisted on hospitals, doctors, insurers and local governments.

Because it includes the IRS, Treasury is the No. 2 culprit, with paperwork requirements up 23 percent this year. The IRS is ObamaCare’s chief enforcer; paperwork misery will continue to soar, especially if and when the employer mandate goes into effect.

ObamaCare gives the IRS 46 new functions, including collecting new taxes and exchanging information about you, your family and your income with HHS and state insurance exchanges.

For example, the IRS requires employers to report the value of insurance you get through work in a new box on your W-2, even though it’s not taxable (yet).

And dealing with the IRS is no longer a once-a-year affair. Have a baby, change jobs or get a divorce, and the IRS will be recalculating your insurance compliance and eligibility for premium subsidies.

“It’s unprecedented in recent history, the amount of responsibility the IRS is being given in an area that most people don’t think of as an IRS function,” J. Russell George, a tax official, told Congress last March.

The administration plainly doesn’t want to tell the truth about these burdens.

For example, it claims that people who are uninsured or lose coverage will spend 12.6 minutes a year to comply with the individual mandate. Preposterous: Even when the Web sites work, it takes far longer to shop for insurance and report to the IRS that you’re compliant.

On July 4, 1776, when American patriots signed their Declaration of Independence from Great Britain, they recounted the crimes of the tyrannical British king: “He has erected a multitude of new offices and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”

Nearly 2½ centuries later, our own government is eating out our substance with mandatory paperwork.

Not to mention the drag on our economy.

According to the Heritage Foundation’s 2014 Index of Economic Freedom, America is the only country to have lost economic freedom for seven straight years, now ranking 12th behind Hong Kong,
Singapore, Australia, Canada and seven other nations.

“Burdensome and redundant regulations are the most common barriers to the free conduct of entrepreneurial activity,” Heritage cautions.

But some benefit from this out-of-control regulatory state.

“Government bureaucracies like complexity because it keeps them busy and funded,” warns Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett Packard. She laments that “as a result of these regulations on steroids, innovation, business creation and job growth are being stifled.”

Government bureaucrats are stealing our time, our economic growth and our liberty. Don’t count on Washington to fix the problem.

In the end, only an outraged public can put a stop to this regulatory oppression.

Betsy McCaughey is the author of “Beating ObamaCare 2014.”