Though I would like to take credit for this, I did get help writing this toon. They would like to remain anonymous. I hope that is okay with Stormland-TV News.
Entries Tagged 'Healthcare' ↓
I can’t believe we let this CLOWN work in the Secretary of State’s office. What a ‘TRUE’ waste of taxpayer dollars. His lastest post about Dems being the root of out of control spending in Pierre is not only far-fetched, it is hypocritical. SD Republicans seem to have amnesia when it comes to corporate bail-outs, no-bid contracts to campaign supporters, increases in FTE’s, state airplanes, prisons and blatant nepotism. All under THEIR watch. Because there is one area I do agree with them on, Democrats are powerless in Pierre. But it doesn’t stop them from denying WORKING people healthcare;
These aren’t the elderly. These aren’t children. They’re able-bodied people who have the use of both hands and feet, who are actively in the workforce. And Democrats want 48,000 of them to be on “Health care welfare.” At taxpayer expense.
It just staggers my imagination.
Governor Daugaard’s address today pointed out that “because of the uncertainties we need to be conservative to committing to future ongoing expenses.” And, hence, the optional expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare was not recommended.
Ironically, they point out the very reason why these people deserve healthcare, they are working, which means they pay payroll taxes to the Federal government. Governor Doo-bad calls it welfare. Last I checked, people receiving welfare are not working.
What amazes me is how hard these same jackasses fought single-payer (using our taxdollars and resources to fight it), but if it would have been implemented it would have saved states billions of dollars in Medicaid costs, because it would have been funded through payroll taxes. But the insurance companies (who profit from sick and dying people) cried they would go out of business. Good. Now if we can just put Republicans out of business in Pierre.
Some SD Legislators get it
UPDATE: from my email box;
I wrote this a couple weeks ago when this was a headline in the Argus. I didn’t send it, but it p’d me off just the same and it still does. And today you wrote about it. SD has the largest number of women who work 2 and 3 jobs to support their family. They all can’t afford healthcare.The headline for this story in the Argus is totally wrong. SD did not opt out, it was the governor who chose to opt out of the health exchange even though there are so many people in the state who need these health benefits and the gov’t. is paying for him. All these stupid republican states opting out is disgusting, they are only doing it because they don’t like President Obama. Plus the gov’t. pays for the healthcare for the first 2 years.And then once again the people on Dailykos are coming to the aid of people on the reservation in South Dakota so they will have Thanksgiving dinner and heat. They did the same thing a year ago. And where is/are the governor and past governors……no where to be seen. But you can bet your bottom dollar they are stealing money that is suppose to go to the people on the reservations. I know the funds to make it easier for them to vote has been used else where. And they could certainly use a clinic and healthcare along with a lot of people who are barely making it in wonderful South Dakota.It’s pathetic.
By David Montgomery
DEADLINE : Under the Affordable Care Act, states had until today to tell the federal government whether they plan to operate a health care exchange themselves. The deadline was extended to Dec. 14 after several states requested more time.
S.D.: Gov. Dennis Daugaard is carrying through with his decision not to run an exchange for South Dakota, according to spokesman Tony Venhuizen.
WHAT IT MEANS: The federal government will build and operate South Dakota’s health care exchange, which is a marketplace on which individuals can buy health insurance and, if eligible, receive subsidies.
WHY: Daugaard says he thinks the cost of operating an exchange would be too high — up to $7 million per year.
WHEN: On Jan. 1, 2014, exchanges will be operational.
EXCHANGES: Insurance plans on the exchange are required to sell to anyone and can vary the cost of premiums based only on age and whether individuals smoke. People will be eligible for government subsidies depending on family income, with subsidies for families up to 400 percent of the federal poverty line.
Under Obamacare, if a state does not establish a health insurance exchange, the federal government must do it for them. Therefore, while ostensibly a protest against the expansion of federal power, these governors are actually forcing the federal government to expand the scope of its operations.
J-Ellis wrote a great column today about how the healthcare industry in SD is pushing to promote a sales tax increase that will pump up to $85 million into their coffers;
Well, the U.S. House advertising won’t win any awards. But on the horizon comes the long-awaited campaign from the people who hope you’re going to vote to raise your own taxes. According to documents collected by Argus Leader reporters and reporter David Montgomery’s account, the people running Moving South Dakota Forward are preparing to spend more than $250,000 in October on television ads.
We won’t know until the campaign reports donations, but it’s a safe bet that the effort will be bankrolled by the major nonprofit hospital systems in South Dakota. And by major nonprofit hospital systems, you can count those on one hand, even if that hand happened to lose a couple digits in a blender accident.
The two hospital goliaths in Sioux Falls spent a good chunk of change to help win voter approval of a new events center last November. One of them, and this is no place to name names, subsequently has spent more money to secure the partial naming rights for said facility. That same nonprofit hospital system is building a fancy sports complex of its own, thanks in part to a generous tax subsidy.
So let’s assume the hospitals are the major contributors to the IM 15 campaign. It won’t be lost on a lot of voters that the hospitals stand to make a lot of money if IM 15 passes. After all, they see a lot of Medicaid patients, and injecting $85 million a year into Medicaid certainly would mean higher reimbursement rates for the professionals and organizations that provide those services.
Few campaigns are perfect. IM 15 asks the state’s voters to sacrifice more of their money in the name of children, the poor and the elderly. That will be a tough sell.
But the sales job will only be tougher if voters think that by opening their wallets, they are only contributing more to the coffers of the nonprofit hospital systems.
Remember just a few years ago the same organizations pumped thousands of dollars into newspaper advertising to help kill Medical Marijuana Measure 13 which was polling well until the ads came out, crushing M13. Of course the healthcare industry had a lot to lose if M13 passed. They want you to use and buy their expensive narcotic painkillers instead of a natural, less expensive, more effective drug like marijuana. They will use the same tactics this time around to suck more money out of us. And they will probably use the tired old argument that if we don’t increase sales taxes there will be an income tax. Hogwash. As long as Republicans run Pierre (which will probably be for the next 1,000 years) there will be NO income tax in SD. Remember also, if this tax increase is approved by voters, this will just give the state the go ahead to spend the other 4 pennies on whatever they want, like refunds and bailouts to companies and corporations that want to locate here. Tune out there message as much as possible and vote NO on M15, unless of course you like subsidizing Sports Complexes and Entertainment facilities.
Unimpressed by the timeline, Hewitt pressed Republicans to move faster. He compared the urgency of repeal to Congressional action in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and argued that people are already “dying” from the law. Thune seemed to agree with the sentiment:
HEWITT: Yeah, the reason I balk a little bit is only because I know people are out there dying under the burdens of this thing.
HEWITT: And they expect, you know, the light speed for Congress is like molasses for the rest of the real world.
HEWITT: And so it just seems to me that after 9/11, you guys moved fast, and I would hope it would happen again.
Like I have said in the past, I don’t agree with everything in the healthcare bill, but it certainly isn’t ‘killing’ people. That is the Republican’s plan. Ironic Johnny is famous for calling the kettle black.
As Helga pointed out to me;
“Apparently people are dying right and left because of “Obamacare.” Even though it hasn’t gone into effect yet, only portions have gone into effect, Thune says “yeah” people are dying. It appears, surprise, surprise, he doesn’t give a shit about the people of South Dakota, the people who need healthcare the most. But why should he care, he has his healthcare.”
I have often said that is the motto of rich powerful Republicans, ‘F’ck U! I got mine!’
Yet it is perfectly legal to force people to have car insurance . . . hmmm.
According to Jackley the Supreme Court upheld the individual insurance requirement because it declared that the penalty for not having coverage by the deadline in 2014 can be collected as a tax.
Jackley says it violates individual and state constitutional rights and puts a burden on small businesses. He says they might not be able to offer the same type of coverage for families.
So forcing me to insure my car is constitutional? Give me a break. While I have mixed feelings on forcing people to get health insurance (It is just a bailout for the insurance companies) I am opposed to the healthcare bill for other reasons. I think if you cannot afford private insurance the government should insure you through medicare with a payroll deduction. I think taking out the single-payer option was the worst thing for this bill. It gave the insurance companies what they wanted, a monopoly.
Okay, we all know Noem is a gigantic hypocrite, and isn’t a good liar. Like when she complains about TARP yet takes farm subsidies, or wants to be a lawmaker and breaks the law and doesn’t even make court appearances. As Madville pointed out a few days ago, she thinks the same about healthcare reform. Similiar to farm subsidies, it seems she is okay with getting taxpayers to subsidize her, but they should not receive the same benefits;
“It’s not much different than any other employee-based policy that’s offered to people working jobs across this country. And it is completely different than what was included in the health care bill and what that would do to our country, so it’s baseless, and they’re searching for something to criticize and it shouldn’t continue,” Noem said.
It’s not any different then an employee-based policy? Huh? It is different, because taxpayers who are not afforded the same insurance plan have to pay for yours. Not only are you a hypocrite, but you are a fat turd liar. You are however telling the truth about it being different then what is in the healthcare bill. Obama and other Dems allowed the Republicans to strip out the public option before it passed.
Should I be mad at Noem about this? Not at all, just your typical hypocritical greedy SD Republican. I’m mad at the voters for not seeing the blatant hypocrisy of Noem during the campaign and voting the dumbass into office.
I consider myself lucky to have met Martin a few years ago as a regular at the Touch of Europe. Unlike most intellectuals, Martin has a fantastic sense of humor, and loves to talk politics and baseball. Especially politics. I have had several engaging conversations with him over the years, and he has reinforced my populist views on several occasions. He told me about the work he was doing on heart disease over a year ago, and I am glad to see he is finally getting the press he deserves for his hard work. Martin’s philosophy on heart disease is simple;
Why treat the disease when we can prevent it?
Well, it is simple really, there is a lot more money to be made treating the disease. Why do you think our hospitals spend millions on building heart care facilities and pennies on research? One wonders.
One more reason we need socialized medicine, eliminate doctors suing insurance companies (H/T- Helga)
Oh, but that’s the ‘catch’ of a quacktor-pracktor, “You’ll be fine if you just keep coming in to get ‘treatments’ ” I told my mom once “If bone-benders really worked, why do you have to keep going back to them for treatments?”
Dorothy and Henry Lentsch were injured in a motor vehicle accident caused by the negligence of a driver insured by DeSmet Insurance Company (“DeSmet”). Unruh Chiropractic Clinic (“Unruh”) treated Lentsches for their accident-related injuries. Prior to treatment, Lentsches executed assignments of the “proceeds” of their personal injury claims against the negligent driver. The assignments were limited to the extent chiropractic services were provided. The assignments gave Unruh a right to the proceeds from any settlement DeSmet paid on behalf of the negligent driver.
Unruh served notices of the assignments on DeSmet. The notices informed DeSmet that if Lentsches had any unpaid chiropractic services, DeSmet “must include” Unruh as a payee on any settlement checks. Lentsches’ son, as attorney-in-fact for his parents, subsequently settled their claims and executed releases. The releases provided that the Lentsches would be responsible for paying their medical care providers. Thereafter, DeSmet delivered the settlement checks directly to the Lentsches, and Unruh was not made a joint payee.
Unruh contacted Lentsches and demanded that they pay their outstanding balances due for the chiropractic services provided. Lentsches refused. Unruh then demanded payment from DeSmet. DeSmet also refused.
Unruh sued DeSmet, seeking to enforce the assignments. DeSmet brought the Lentsches into the lawsuit as third-party defendants. Unruh and DeSmet filed cross motions for summary judgment. A magistrate court granted summary judgment in favor of Unruh and against DeSmet. The court acknowledged that an assignment of a “claim” for personal injuries is invalid and unenforceable under the common law. The court, however, concluded that an assignment of “proceeds” is distinguishable from the common-law prohibition on the assignment of claims. Therefore, the magistrate court concluded that Lentsches’ assignments of proceeds were valid and enforceable.
DeSmet appealed to the circuit court, arguing that assignments of proceeds violate public policy. The circuit court acknowledged a split authority in other states regarding the validity of assignments of proceeds of personal injury claims. The circuit court followed those authorities distinguishing between assignments of proceeds and assignments of claims. The court also found that there was no public policy reason to preclude an assignment of proceeds. It therefore held that the assignments in this case were valid, and it affirmed the magistrate court.
DeSmet now appeals to this Court. The Court must determine the validity of assignments of proceeds of personal injury claims.
Mr. James R. Even, Attorney for Plaintiff and Appellee A. Unruh Chiropractic Clinic
Mr. Larry M. Von Wald, Attorney for Defendant and Appellant DeSmet Insurance Company of South Dakota
I was very much taken back by the article in the June 6 Argus Leader regarding Wellmark Blue Cross Blue Shield’s plans for an 18 percent rate hike in South Dakota.
As with the 18th-century saying, “Let them eat cake,” the Wellmark spokesman who suggested in the article that a healthy 60-year-old just “grin and bear it on the insurance” is likewise oblivious to the problem.
According to the chart that accompanied the article, Wellmark has doubled the premiums on its individual health insurance policies in only six years (remember, you must compound, not only add, the numbers in the chart).
This last statement in this letter to the editor says it all;
Our health care system, especially when it comes to cost, needs a radical overhaul, something the recent federal legislation will not accomplish. The system is more than just a little bit broken.
One must beg the question of who represents the health care consumer? From my perspective, no one, no one at all.
I find it ironic that after the insurance industry beat the crap out of Washington and got their way the next thing they did was raise their rates, 18%, even though it was 18 times higher then the rate of inflation.