Bachus claims Social Security Default in 2 years. More potential proof of government mismanagement of programs.

�The situation is much worse than people realize, especially because of the problems brought on by the recession, near depression,� said Bachus, R-Vestavia Hills, in an interview with the Tuscaloosa News editorial board.

Bachus, the ranking member of the House Committee on Financial Services, said most people seem unaware of the impending crisis. He initially said Social Security could face "default" within two years, but his staff responded later saying the Congresssman intended to say "deficit."

�What this recession has done to Social Security is pretty alarming,� he said. �We�ve known for 15 years that we were going to have to make adjustments to Social Security, but we still thought that was seven or eight years down the road. But if things don�t improve very quickly, we�re going to be dealing with that problem before we know it.�

The solvency of Social Security, which provides pensions for people older than 65, has not played a major role in the current debate about health care in Congress. Bachus said it will not likely be addressed in any health-care bill the House eventually passes, although if a Social Security bailout is needed, it will invariably have an impact on government health-care programs.

In the debate over health-care reform, Bachus said that he could support a bill that includes privately administered, nonprofit health-care co-operatives, and the elimination of fraud and waste in existing government programs like Medicaid and Medicare.

The creation of health-care co-ops run by members is an idea that has gained momentum as Democrats and President Barack Obama seem to have moved away from insisting on a �public option,� a government-run alternative to private health insurance offered by for-profit companies.

�I cannot vote for a bill that has the government intruding into the private sector, subsidizing health care and eventually putting the insurance companies out of business,� Bachus said.

As for the looming Social Security crisis, Bachus said solutions are beginning to be discussed.

�We could raise the retirement age, or in the worst case, cut back on some benefits,� he said. �But that is something we are just now beginning to get a handle on.�

Bachus visited The News the day after a standing-room-only crowd of 2,000 people attended a health care public forum he hosted in Birmingham on Monday night.

Unlike some town hall meetings that have turned chaotic across the country as members of Congress have returned to their districts during the August congressional recess, Bachus said there was �only a little friction� between opponents and supporters of various health-care proposals advanced by the Democratic majority in Congress.

�I think everyone was for the most part civil and we had a lot of people just agree to disagree,� he said. �But you can tell that health care is an issue that has energized the country, because I have never had a town meeting with 2,000 people. And we even had to turn away a lot of people because of fire department regulations.�

Reach Tommy Stevenson at tommy.stevenson@tuscaloosanews.com or 205-722-0194.

via tuscaloosanews.com

This has been thrown around for several decades now and everytime Americans have been assured that it has been "fixed." The major problem is that the Social Security Trust Fund can only invest in government securities which creates an overly attempting, off-budget slush fund for Congress to spend in exchange for government bonds. This has been a favorite source of extra funding almost since its inception. Many times when the media reports the budget deficit numbers it is after all available funding has been sucked out of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Now tell me again why I want the government taking over the healthcare industry? If you need more proof look at Amtrak and the US Postal Service.

Posted via web from conservativedynamics's posterous

Thousands of surgeries may be cut in Vancouver, B.C. due to government underfunding. Get ready America here it comes.

St. Paul's Hospital cardiologists peform a heart procedure.

Photograph by: ..., Vancouver Sun file

VANCOUVER — Vancouver patients needing neurosurgery, treatment for vascular diseases and other medically necessary procedures can expect to wait longer for care, NDP health critic Adrian Dix said Monday.

Dix said a Vancouver Coastal Health Authority document shows it is considering chopping more than 6,000 surgeries in an effort to make up for a dramatic budgetary shortfall that could reach $200 million.

“This hasn’t been announced by the health authority … but these cuts are coming,” Dix said, citing figures gleaned from a leaked executive summary of “proposed VCH surgical reductions.”

The health authority confirmed the document is genuine, but said it represents ideas only.

“It is a planning document. It has not been approved or implemented,” said spokeswoman Anna Marie D’Angelo.

Dr. Brian Brodie, president of the BC Medical Association, called the proposed surgical cuts “a nightmare.”

“Why would you begin your cost-cutting measures on medically necessary surgery? I just can’t think of a worse place,” Brodie said.

According to the leaked document, Vancouver Coastal — which oversees the budget for Vancouver General and St. Paul’s hospitals, among other health-care facilities — is looking to close nearly a quarter of its operating rooms starting in September and to cut 6,250 surgeries, including 24 per cent of cases scheduled from September to March and 10 per cent of all medically necessary elective procedures this fiscal year.

The plan proposes cutbacks to neurosurgery, ophthalmology, vascular surgery, and 11 other specialized areas.

As many of 112 full-time jobs — including 13 anesthesiologist positions — would be affected by the reductions, the document says.

“Clearly this will impact the capacity of the health-care system to provide care, not just now but in the future,” Dix said.

Further reductions in surgeries are scheduled during the Olympics, when the health authority plans to close approximately a third of its operating rooms.

Two weeks ago, Dix released a Fraser Health Authority draft communications plan listing proposed clinical care cuts, including a 10-per-cent cut in elective surgeries and longer waits for MRI scans.

The move comes after the province acknowledged all health authorities together will be forced to cut staff, limit some services and increase fees to find $360 million in savings during the current fiscal year.

In all, Fraser Health is looking at a $160-million funding shortfall.

D’Angelo said Vancouver Coastal’s deficit is closer to $90 million — almost a third of which ($23 million) has already been absorbed through reductions in non-clinical administration efficiencies.

Vancouver Coastal performed 67,000 surgeries last year, an increase of 6,500 surgeries over 2007.

“What has now happened is that now our wait times are about 25 per cent lower than the provincial average,” D’Angelo said. “We have put a dent in that wait list.”

Brodie acknowledged surgical waiting times have dropped significantly in recent years, particularly for patients needing hip and joint replacements.

He said the proposed cuts threaten those advancements.

“It sounds like we are going backwards here,” he said.

Total health spending in British Columbia was $15.7 billion this year, up about four per cent over last year’s total of 15.1 billion, according to figures provided by the ministry of health.

Health Minister Kevin Falcon was unavailable for comment Monday on the proposed health-care cuts. A ministry spokesman said Falcon is away on his honeymoon until the end of August.

Elsewhere in British Columbia, the province will look to replace the head of the Interior Health Authority, Murray Ramsden, after he announced he will step down at the end of the year.

Ramsden has said his decision to retire is not related to financial problems faced by the authority.

dahansen@vancouversun.com

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

via vancouversun.com

If Obama and Congress gets their way this is what awaits Americans. Rationing and postponement of major medical procedures are part and parcel of nationalized healthcare systems. For those of you shaking your heads in disapproval at my comments, don't be fooled. This is the direction we are moving should HR3200 or anything similiar is forced upon us.

Posted via web from conservativedynamics's posterous

Obama down to 52% approval according to Gallup. HCR is like a boat anchor tied around his approval ratings. Even some Congressional rats are smart enough to get off the HCR Titanic.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx#

And yet Obama keeps riding the HCR Titanic to the bottom.  For receiving such acclaim for being politically astute, Obama is really blind to this one.  The more he pushes this type of policy the more his approval rating will plunge like a waterfall.

Posted via email from conservativedynamics's posterous

Showing a friend the benefits of using Posterous to post across multiple social network sites!!

There is nothing important with this post except that I am just showing a friend the power of Posterous to post across multiple social network sites.

Posted via email from conservativedynamics's posterous

What if the Constitutional Convention Happened Today?

Thought I would share a discussion board comment I posted on one of my Master's Degree courses. The question had to do with what would be different if the Constitution Convention would have been held today rather than in 1787.

Had the Constitutional Convention occurred today rather than in 1787 the document we know today would have been drastically different as would have the convention itself. Initially, the convention would not have the secret meetings it enjoyed. The media would not have allowed it. There would have been reports on the happenings, individuals attending, and “exclusive” leaks from inside the convention. These reports would have ranged from revealing scandalous stories to publicly questioning the motives of the participants to discussing potential consequences over each proposed addition to or subtraction from the document. Wall to wall coverage and commentary of the meetings, at the very least, on the 24 hour cable news channels would have continued throughout the proceedings.

Special interest groups would not have allowed closed door hearings either. These groups would have fought for, and most likely obtained with help from their participant allies, access to the meetings and participants in order to lobby for the addition of language to further their desired causes. In addition, there would have been a massive public relation campaign by special interest groups to get the public to apply pressure to the delegates to add language or exceptions for specific causes or groups. This would, in turn, create a situation where the delegates would have to mount their own public relations campaign through press conferences, press releases, and other means to explain what they were doing and why in regards to the more controversial parts of the document.

Had there been closed door meetings, the participants would have had to deal with the unending litigation by various organizations suing to get access to the meetings and drafts of the documents. Had that failed, the losing organizations would have taken their case to the airwaves in an attempt to create enough pressure on the participants of the convention to relent and open up the convention to any curious soul that came along.

As for the delegates, there would be a great deal of pressure on them. The campaigns to become a delegate to the Convention would be extremely expensive with a great deal of pandering to various interest groups being quite evident, as seen in political campaigns of today. The delegates would most likely hold several town halls to get public input and defend their positions on the issues and document language. The delegates would also feel the need to have regular press conferences and public relations campaigns to garner support for their positions. Should there be any major disagreements between delegates, rather than hammer it out privately, the grievances and conflicts would be aired publicly as is done today with Congressional quarrels.

As for the document itself, the Constitution would have been much different than we know it today. It would have been a much longer and more specific document. We would not enjoy the broad language had the Constitution been created today. There would be many specific exceptions and detailed rights placed in the document making it much more unwieldy and complex. Many of the restrictions and limitations on the federal government currently enjoyed by Americans would not be included. Rather there would be detailed “rights” and “responsibilities” afforded to the federal government in allowing it to act in broad ways regarding regulation and the protection and dissemination of rights to the people themselves. The Constitution would become more of We the Government and less We the People. The breakdown of the branches of government and intended checks and balances would not be the same due to the constant push for supremacy of one governing body over another. On the other hand, The Bill of Rights would have been included initially rather than through amendments, although they would have been more lengthy, exception ridden, and detailed.

In the end, the convention would have been an open series of contentious meetings where the media and special interests would have had wide open access. There would be intensive special interest lobbying, continual press conferences, public quarrels among delegates, and wall to wall coverage by the media. The document itself would be a much more complex and specific document without the restrictions on government that we enjoy now.