Obamacare Forces Healthcare Workers To Unionize

[red states rule]

Now you get an idea why Obama isn't going to let the "public option" go. It is nothing more then power grab, not only the government, but the unions as well


Read the Union Health-Care Label
Get ready for Detroit-style labor relations in our hospitals.

By MARK MIX
In the heated debates on health-care reform, not enough attention is being paid to the huge financial windfalls ObamaCare will dole out to unions—or to the provisions in the various bills in Congress that will help bring about the forced unionization of the health-care industry.

Tucked away in thousands of pages of complex new rules, regulations and mandates are special privileges and giveaways that could have devastating consequences for the health-care sector and the American economy at large.

The Senate version opens the door to implement forced unionization schemes pursued by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois in 2005 and Gray Davis of California in 1999. Both men repaid tremendous political debts to Andy Stern and his Service Employees International Union (SEIU) by reclassifying state-reimbursed in-home health-care (and child-care) contractors as state employees—and forcing them to pay union dues.

Following this playbook, the Senate bill creates a "personal care attendants workforce advisory panel" that will likely impose union affiliation to qualify for a newly created "community living assistance services and support (class)" reimbursement plan.

The current House version of ObamaCare (H.R. 3200) goes much further. Section 225(A) grants Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius tremendous discretionary authority to regulate health-care workers "under the public health insurance option." Monopoly bargaining and compulsory union dues may quickly become a required standard resulting in potentially hundreds of thousands of doctors and nurses across the country being forced into unions.

Ms. Sebelius will be taking her marching orders from the numerous union officials who are guaranteed seats on the various federal panels (such as the personal care panel mentioned above) charged with recommending health-care policies. Big Labor will play a central role in directing federal health-care policy affecting hundreds of thousands of doctors, surgeons and nurses.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574400571702189240.html

[stephanie]

we need to get the message out that this bill or any bill the little Marxist pushes in NOT about a care for our health care...

it is all about POWER over us...

more and more people are seeing through it....

[red states rule]

we need to get the message out that this bill or any bill the little Marxist pushes in NOT about a care for our health care...

it is all about POWER over us...

more and more people are seeing through it....

I am doing my part Steph and the message is getting out


Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent

By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer Alan Fram, Associated Press Writer – Wed Sep 9, 11:45 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Public disapproval of President Barack Obama's handling of health care has leaped to 52 percent, according to Associated Press-GfK poll that underscores the country's glowering mood as the White House made a renewed pitch for an overhaul.

Just 42 percent approve of the president's work on the high-profile health issue. The survey was released Wednesday before his nationally televised effort to persuade Congress and voters to back his drive to reshape the nation's $2.5 trillion-a-year medical system.

Spotlighting how Obama lost ground this summer, his latest approval figures on health were essentially reversed since July, when 50 percent approved of his health effort and just 43 percent disapproved.

The poll was taken over five days just before Obama's speech to Congress. That speech reflected Obama's determination to push ahead despite growing obstacles.

"I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it's better politics to kill this plan than to improve it," Obama said Wednesday night. "I won't stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what's in the plan, we'll call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090910/ap_on_re_us/us_ap_poll_health_care

[stephanie]

I only heard excerpts of his speech, he sounded just like a Chicago thug..

I don't want anything this thug is selling..

[red states rule]

I only heard excerpts of his speech, he sounded just like a Chicago thug..

I don't want anything this thug is selling..

I would hate to have my first heart bypass done by a surgical team that clears $400/week after union dues.

"Oh hell, it's time to punch out, they cut back the overtime allotment this week"

"But Dr., what about the patient with his chest open on the table ?"

Close him up, and if he's still alive after the weekend, we'll take another look Monday morning after we clock in."

"yes Dr."

Union medicine and Obamacare at it's best

[bullypulpit]

Now you get an idea why Obama isn't going to let the "public option" go. It is nothing more then power grab, not only the government, but the unions as well


Read the Union Health-Care Label
Get ready for Detroit-style labor relations in our hospitals.

By MARK MIX
In the heated debates on health-care reform, not enough attention is being paid to the huge financial windfalls ObamaCare will dole out to unions—or to the provisions in the various bills in Congress that will help bring about the forced unionization of the health-care industry.

Tucked away in thousands of pages of complex new rules, regulations and mandates are special privileges and giveaways that could have devastating consequences for the health-care sector and the American economy at large.

The Senate version opens the door to implement forced unionization schemes pursued by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois in 2005 and Gray Davis of California in 1999. Both men repaid tremendous political debts to Andy Stern and his Service Employees International Union (SEIU) by reclassifying state-reimbursed in-home health-care (and child-care) contractors as state employees—and forcing them to pay union dues.

Following this playbook, the Senate bill creates a "personal care attendants workforce advisory panel" that will likely impose union affiliation to qualify for a newly created "community living assistance services and support (class)" reimbursement plan.

The current House version of ObamaCare (H.R. 3200) goes much further. Section 225(A) grants Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius tremendous discretionary authority to regulate health-care workers "under the public health insurance option." Monopoly bargaining and compulsory union dues may quickly become a required standard resulting in potentially hundreds of thousands of doctors and nurses across the country being forced into unions.

Ms. Sebelius will be taking her marching orders from the numerous union officials who are guaranteed seats on the various federal panels (such as the personal care panel mentioned above) charged with recommending health-care policies. Big Labor will play a central role in directing federal health-care policy affecting hundreds of thousands of doctors, surgeons and nurses.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574400571702189240.html

Here is what 225(A) of H.R. 3200 says...

<blockquote>(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish conditions of participation for health care providers under the public health insurance option.</blockquote>

Further reading of section 225 makes NO MENTION of unions or "Big Labor".

Chock full of weasle words the article is little more than rank speculation fueled by Ruppert Murdoch's right-wing editorial bent.

[red states rule]

Here is what 225(A) of H.R. 3200 says...

<blockquote>(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish conditions of participation for health care providers under the public health insurance option.</blockquote>

Further reading of section 225 makes NO MENTION of unions or "Big Labor".

Chock full of weasle words the article is little more than rank speculation fueled by Ruppert Murdoch's right-wing editorial bent.

Like Mainman, keep lying and ignoring the truth BP

snip

There's more. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has suggested that the federal government could pay for health-care reform by taxing American workers' existing health-care benefits—but he would exempt union-negotiated health-care plans. Under Mr. Baucus's scheme, the government could impose costs of up to $20,000 per employee on nonunion businesses already struggling to afford health care plans.

Mr. Baucus's proposal would give union officials another tool to pressure employers into turning over their employees to Big Labor. Rather than provide the lavish benefits required by Obamacare, employers could allow a union to come in and negotiate less costly benefits than would otherwise be required. Such plans could be continuously exempted.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574400571702189240.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

[theHawk]

Bully maybe you can explain why Dems are so afraid of the proposed Health Care Bill of Rights? Obama claims people won't "need" such a bill, why would patients not need these protections? Maybe because he has every intention of violating these protections?


PROTECT MEDICARE AND NOT CUT IT IN THE NAME OF HEALTH CARE REFORM: President Obama and Congressional Democrats are promoting a government-run health care experiment that will cut over $500 billion from Medicare to be used to pay for their plan. Medicare should not be raided to pay for another entitlement.
PROHIBIT GOVERNMENT FROM GETTING BETWEEN SENIORS AND THEIR DOCTORS: The Democrats’ government-run health care experiment will give patients less power to control their own medical decisions, and create government boards that would decide what treatments would or wouldn’t be funded. Republicans believe in patient-centered reforms that put the priorities of seniors before government.

PROHIBIT EFFORTS TO RATION HEALTH CARE BASED ON AGE: The Democrats’ government-run health care experiment would set up a “comparative effectiveness research commission” where health care treatment decisions could be limited based on a patient’s age. Republicans believe that health care decisions are best left up to seniors and their doctors.
PREVENT GOVERNMENT FROM INTERFERING WITH END-OF-LIFE CARE DISCUSSIONS: The Democrats’ government-run health care experiment would have seniors meet with a doctor to discuss end-of-life care that could mean limiting treatment. Republicans believe that government should not interfere with end-of-life care discussions between a patient and a doctor.
ENSURE SENIORS CAN KEEP THEIR CURRENT COVERAGE: As Democrats continue to propose steep cuts to Medicare in order to pay for their government-run health care experiment, these cuts threaten millions of seniors with being forced from their current Medicare Advantage plans. Republicans believe that seniors should not be targeted by a government-run health care bill and forced out of their current Medicare coverage.
PROTECT VETERANS BY PRESERVING TRICARE AND OTHER BENEFIT PROGRAMS FOR MILITARY FAMILIES: Democrats recently proposed raising veterans’ costs for the Tricare For Life program that many veterans rely on for treatment. Republicans oppose increasing the burden on our veterans and believe America should honor our promises to them.

http://barackobamaexperiment.com/posts/1502

[red states rule]

and lets not forget the massive payoff to the unions


Union Pensions Getting BIG Payoff From Obamacare
Publius Forum ^ | 08/14/09 | Warner Todd Huston

Posted on Friday, August 14, 2009 9:39:51 AM by Mobile Vulgus

It isn’t just out of the goodness of their hearts that Big Labor is gearing up to spend millions to help President Obama to jam Obamacare down the throats of the American people. The unions stand to get a big payoff of $10 billion to supplement their failing pension plans.

The President of the AFL-CIO recently announced that the union would jump into the healthcare fight to help out “working people.” John Sweeney also said that the healthcare fight is “the next big step in our march to turn around America.”

But unions already have their own healthcare plans and Obama promised -- for whatever an Obama promise is worth -- that union plans would be untouched by Obamacare. So, what are the unions in the fight for if it doesn’t really touch them?

The answer to that question appears in the House bill on page 65, section 164 where unions are to receive a $10 billion dollar infusion of taxpayer’s money to supplement their failing plans through a program called the “reinsurance plan.”

http://www.publiusforum.com/2009/08/14/union-pensions-getting-big-payoff-from-obamacare/

[cat slave]

A little humor from my inbox:

Subject: Fw: TOP TEN INDICATORS THAT YOUR EMPLOYER HAS CHANGED TO OBAMA'S HEALTH CARE PLAN

.

.




TOP TEN INDICATORS THAT YOUR EMPLOYER HAS CHANGED TO OBAMA’S HEALTH CARE PLAN:

(10) Your annual breast exam is done at Hooters.

(9) Directions to your doctor's office include, "Take a left when you enter the trailer park."

(8) The tongue depressors taste faintly of Fudgesicles.

(7) The only proctologist in the plan is "Gus" from Roto-rooter.

(6) The only item listed under Preventative Care Coverage is "an apple a day."

(5) Your primary care physician is wearing the pants you gave to Goodwill last month.

(4) "The patient is responsible for 200% of out-of-network charges," is not a typographical error.

(3) The only expense covered 100% is "embalming".

(2) Your Prozac comes in different colors with little M's on them.

AND THE NUMBER ONE SIGN YOU'VE JOINED OBAMA’S HEALTH CARE PLAN:

(1) You ask for Viagra, and they give you a Popsicle stick and duct tape.