YORK COUNTY, S.C. — A new law going into effect in South Carolina will help protect pregnant women on the job. Governor Henry McMaster recently signed the Pregnancy Accommodations Act which ensures no woman with child in the Palmetto State has to choose …
Last week, Virginia’s general assembly voted to expand Medicaid under the auspices of Obamacare. The commonwealth’s legislators had wisely resisted doing so for years, but four GOP state senators broke ranks to vote for this bill in exchange for a provision stipulating an anemic work requirement. The “news” media have, of course, touted this betrayal as a victory for the poor. It is however, precisely the reverse. Expansion will consign thousands of truly poor and disabled Virginians to purgatorial Medicaid waiting lists while advancing able-bodied adults with incomes above the federal poverty level (FPL) to the front of the line.
Why would Virginia pursue such an obviously unjust policy? Like all Democratic programs, it’s about power and money. Obamacare incentivizes expansion states to shift Medicaid’s focus to able-bodied adults by paying over 90 percent of their coverage costs, while the federal share of costs for traditional Medicaid patients remains below 60 percent. This does not mean, however, that doctors and hospitals will receive more money. Providers will continue to be paid less by Medicaid than the cost of treatment whether the patients are expansion or traditional enrollees. The extra money will go to political slush funds and insurance companies.
Medicaid expansion doesn’t work like the original program, which was administered by the states as a safety net for poor children, pregnant women, the disabled, and the elderly. Management of Obamacare’s corrupted version of the program is farmed out to insurance companies. A typical example is Wellcare, which accrued over $10.6 billion in 2017 from its coverage of able-bodied adults. The company plans to reinvest $2.5 billion of that revenue in the acquisition of Meridian Health Plans of Illinois and Michigan, which will increase its Medicaid portfolio by 37 percent. Meanwhile, truly poor patients die on waiting lists.
This is not conjecture. A recent study, conducted by the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), revealed that at least 21,904 Americans have withered away and died on Medicaid waiting lists in the states that expanded the program under Obamacare. Even worse, the 21,904 figure reported in the study almost certainly understates the true death toll. A number of expansion states were somehow “unable” to provide FGA with death totals, while others implausibly claimed that there were none to report. It is nonetheless clear that Medicaid waiting lists in expansion states constitute a kind of death row for the genuinely poor.
The worst carnage has occurred just north of the Beltway. Maryland is easily the deadliest state for traditional Medicaid applicants, chalking up no fewer than 8,495 deaths among individuals languishing on its waiting list. During the same time period, even as these patients were left to die, the bureaucrats of the Old Line State enrolled very nearly 300,000 able-bodied adults under the aegis of Obamacare. Louisiana took second place in killing its traditional Medicaid patients. The Pelican State reported 5,534 deaths among the unfortunates who wound up on its waiting list, while 451,000 able-bodied adults were enrolled under Obamacare’s expansion.
Additional states whose Medicaid waiting lists have killed a thousand or more people include New Mexico, where 2,031 poor and disabled patients died while the state signed up 259,537 enrollees under Obamacare’s expansion scheme. Michigan left 1,970 of its residents to die while enrolling 665,057 in its new and improved Medicaid program. West Virginia allowed 1,093 patients to die on its waiting list while signing up 181,105 able-bodied enrollees. The remaining expansion states are mere also-rans with death tolls ranging from Iowa’s paltry 989 down to Minnesota, which managed to leave only 15 of its poor and disabled citizens for dead.
This is the august company Virginia’s General Assembly chose to join last week. The Old Dominion will become the 33rd state to take Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion bait, demonstrating that the commonwealth’s politicians have learned little or nothing from the deadly experiences of the previous states that were gaffed by their own greed. Those Medicaid expansion states still have nearly 250,000 poor, disabled, and elderly individuals wasting away on waiting lists. Yet Obamacare advocates in Utah, Idaho, and Nebraska — blissfully unaware of the death tolls quoted above — are working to pass expansion in November via referenda.
Maine activists have already tricked the voters of the Pine Tree State into passing a referendum approving expansion, but the program hasn’t been implemented because Governor Paul Lepage has refused to go forward: “My administration will not implement Medicaid expansion until it has been fully funded by the Legislature at the levels DHHS has calculated, and I will not support increasing taxes on Maine families.” This speaks to one of expansion’s most profound ironies. Even if Washington continues footing most of the bill, herding the able-bodied into Medicaid is a budget buster for the states. It nearly broke Maine the last time they tried it.
Medicaid expansion under Obamacare privileges able-bodied adults with incomes above FPL, states can’t pay for it in the long haul, and it causes the genuinely poor to be dumped onto waiting lists where they quietly die in their thousands. Yet the Old Dominion’s newly-minted Governor, Ralph Northam, will gleefully sign an expansion bill into law this week as the leaders of his party and the media beam benevolently from on high. His name may even be uttered by the Great Mentioner as potential presidential material. For any Democrat, that’s certainly well worth a little inequity, the occasional budget deficit, and a few thousand human sacrifices.
The post Yes, Virginia, Medicaid Expansion Will Harm the Poor appeared first on The American Spectator.
Rationing is for wartime, and for communism. And it’s also for patients under Obamacare.
Big changes are coming to the Obamacare marketplace for California, as hospitals are being punished for providing the ‘wrong’ kind of care.
According to Dr. Lance Lang of Covered California, the stat’s health insurance marketplace under Obamacare,
“We’re saying ‘time’s up.’ We’ve told health plans that by the end of 2019, we want networks to only include hospitals that have achieved this target.”
According to WBUR news,
“Here’s how hospitals will be measured: They must perform fewer unnecessary cesarean sections, prescribe fewer opioids, and cut back on the use of imaging (X-rays, MRIs and CT scans) to diagnose and treat back pain.”
I can already hear the uproar from women over the definition of an “unnecessary c-section.”
Essentially, hospitals will now we judged by a few key targets.
Let’s take c-sections for example. The target for hospitals is now to deliver more babies vaginally while ignoring the reason for c-sections. With fewer c-sections, women are less in control of their own health outcomes, unless they work with their doctor to lie on their paperwork to change the need for a c-section to one that’s approved by the marketplace.
According to Lang, California hospitals are using c-sections for 40% of births in the state. One hospital in particular delivers by c-section in 78% of cases.
“That means that when a woman goes to a hospital, it’s the culture of the hospital that really determines whether or not she gets a cesarean section, not so much her own health.”
I get the feeling that Lang has never spoken to a pregnant lady before.
So why focus on c-sections? It’s because payments for hospitals are higher for c-sections than for vaginal deliveries. According to Health Care Journalism,
“You’ve got to align payment incentives with the quality goal that you’re seeking… if you’re paying more to just have episodic c-sections, then all the money is going there instead of where it needs to be.”
That is, c-sections are raking in too much money, and they must be stopped. Sorry ladies, your own preferences don’t matter.
And with opioids. Instead of tracking usage, and using the data to figure out if the use of opioids is causing harm by feeding addiction, or if opioid usage is related to patients not getting treatment for their pain, the only goal is less opioids.
It’s similar to the 1990s craze of low fat. Nutrition guidelines pushed for lower fat content, in foods, which instead drove up the amount of sugar and the number of calories, making people fatter than before. In other words, it’s impossible to control one factor without seeing change elsewhere.
Other Goals: Fewer Scans For Back Pain
From the perspective of patients, back pain is notoriously hard to diagnose, and we all know several people who spent years struggling to have their pain recognized and treated.
By limiting the number of x-rays, MRIs and CT scans to find the source of back pain, Dr. Lang says that it’s actually a “quality improvement project” because it has a “deadline.”
According to The Spectator,
“Much of the “research” upon which the initiative is based was provided by the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF)… a think tank that does a lot of… well… thinking for bureaucrats like Dr. Lang. It is the primary source for his talking points on C-sections as well as the cutbacks on diagnostic tests for back pain. The latter has long been the goal of CHCF, which deems such tests unnecessary.”
Here’s a snippet from a report published by the CHCF specifically on addressing the ‘overuse’ of MRIs:
“Focusing on reducing wasteful spending, most supported stricter rules for coverage of MRIs for the first few weeks of acute low back pain. Since other treatments (e.g., physical therapy) can help patients, these stricter rules seemed reasonable.”
Maybe they’re making sure there’s enough money to deal with the onslaught of STDs including HIV that have been hitting the state of late, after Moonbeam Jerry Brown decriminalized forgetting to tell a sexual partner that you have AIDS.
Recently, we highlighted some of the bonkers new laws that were rolling out on the left coast, including bans on plastic bags and banning state visits to neighbors who aren’t cool with tranny bathrooms.
“Before we get started: California’s government is currently $1.3 trillion in debt. Instead of working on their economy or even the ridiculous traffic snarls, they’re prioritizing these insane laws.”
What a nice state.
Sources: WBUR, Spectator, Health Care Journalism
The post California Punishing Hospitals That Provide Too Much Health Care: ObamaCare Rationing Setting In appeared first on Joe For America.
Anyone who watched I Love Lucy would have thought that Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz shared the perfect kind of marriage. But behind the veneer of happiness was a tragic love story that will break your heart. Even today, people watch reruns of the show and dream about how they could find a love as they shared. But it was a TV show after all and nothing like their real marriage.
When the pair first met it was love at first sight. Ball was a 28-year-old B-actress at the time starting her movie career. Arnaz was a 23-year-old Cuban-American bandleader. And he was, as Lucy admits, not her type one bit. But they began a whirlwind love like a fairy tale. But there was trouble in paradise.
As Lucy’s director said, it was “the kind of marriage that has failure written all over it.”
Arnaz was never happy. And with his hectic schedule, Lucy tried her best to give him joy.
“Lucy always wanted to please him,” a friend of Lucy’s told Closer. “If he wanted something, she would get it for him. If they were seated and he needed more room, she would slide over. I found it surprising because she was such a strong, independent lady, but when it came to Desi, she was very old-fashioned.”
In the mid-1940s, their marriage was teetering on the edge of collapse. Arnaz was an alcoholic and a cheat. And Ball filed for divorce.
But then their first child, Lucie, was born and Arnaz found purpose in life. And then they got their TV show. They’d have to fake it in front of America.
CBS producers fought against having Arnaz in the show. He was Cuban and had an accent. But she fought hard for him and won. The show went on to break boundaries, including their interracial relationship and her being pregnant on the show.
But Arnaz couldn’t stand being second to Ball on the show. And his lousy behavior reared its ugly head again.
Ball started to read about her husband’s terrible acts in gossip magazines. And Richard Keith, who played Little Ricky on the show, witnessed their famous fights.
“We heard a lot of loud arguing and cursing and glass shattering and screaming, and we were scared. [Their son] Desi Jr. turned to me and said, ‘There they go again.’”
Arnaz admitted to his biographer Bart Andrews that “by 1956 it wasn’t even a marriage anymore.”
And Andrews explained more.
“They were just going through a routine for the children,” Andrews said. “She told me that for the last five years of their marriage, it was ‘just booze and broads.’ That was in her divorce papers, as a matter of fact.”
They divorced in 1960. And both would remarry again.
Ball later talked to Barbara Walters about their divorce.
“I married a loser before,” she said. “(Arnaz) could work very hard, he was brilliant, but he had to lose. He had to fail at everything he built up.”
Before he died in 1986 from Cancer, Arnaz told Ball, “I love you too, honey. Good luck with your show.”
Actor Morgan Freeman, 80, is the latest famous person to be targeted by the #MeToo movement.
No less than eight women have come forward with allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior by Freeman.
What are the details of the allegations?
On Thursday, CNN reported that multiple women have come forward to accuse the long-time actor of harassment and more.
According to the outlet, 16 people came forward with various stories about Freeman, and at least eight of them made accusations against the actor. The other eight were reportedly witnesses to alleged incidents.
All of those who came forward remained anonymous, save for the report’s co-author, entertainment reporter Chloe Melas.
One such woman alleged that she was exposed to “months of harassment” from Freeman during her time as a production assistant on one of his 2015 films.
Some of her allegations included “unwanted touching” and verbal sexual harassment, as well as Freeman’s purported propensity to try and lift her skirts to see if she was wearing underwear.
Another woman reported that Freeman sexually harassed her and her female assistant on “numerous occasions” while making a 2012 film.
“He did comment on our bodies,” the unidentified woman said. “We knew that if he was coming by … not to wear any top that would show our breasts, not to wear anything that would show our bottoms, meaning not wearing clothes that [were] fitted.”
The outlet reported that “four people who worked in production capacities on movie sets” over the last decade described Freeman as “repeatedly behaving in ways that made women feel uncomfortable at work,” and some alleged that he subjected them to “unwanted touching.”
Others Freeman reportedly targeted included entertainment reporters, like Melas.
“Three entertainment reporters who spoke to CNN said Freeman made inappropriate remarks to them during press junkets,” the report proclaimed.
Melas said that she was six months pregnant during her alleged encounter with Freeman, whom she interviewed at a press junket for 2017’s “Going in Style.”
“Freeman, in a room full of people, including his co-stars … shook Melas’ hand, not letting go while repeatedly looking her up and down and saying more than once a variation of, ‘I wish I was there,’” the report read. “[Melas] says he also said to her, ‘You are ripe.’”
According to Melas, cameras were rolling during the junket and caught Freeman’s comment of “Boy, do I wish I was there.”
Any other remarks, however, were reportedly not caught on camera.
Melas reported the incident to CNN’s human resources department, who reached out to Warner Bros. — the film distributor for “Going in Style” — and their human resources department.
Melas said that Warner Bros. could not corroborate her account of the alleged incident because “only one of Freeman’s remarks was on video and the Warner Bros. employees present did not notice anything.”
Other women accused the actor of pressing himself up against them, commenting on their bodies and outfits, and making sexually suggestive remarks.
One male interviewee also called Freeman a “creepy uncle” type.
Most women said that they did not report Freeman’s alleged behaviors because they were afraid for the security of their jobs.
CNN reported that they’d reached out to “dozens more people who worked for or with Freeman.”
“Some praised Freeman, saying they never witnessed any questionable behavior, or that he was a consummate professional on set and in the office,” a portion of the article read.
A spokesperson for Freeman did not respond to CNN’s repeated request for comment on the report, which included “a detailed list of the accusations” against the actor.
What did Freeman say?
Shortly after the CNN report went live, Freeman addressed the allegations head-on.
“Anyone who knows me or has worked with me knows I am not someone who would intentionally offend or knowingly make anyone feel uneasy,” a statement from Freeman read. “I apologize to anyone who felt uncomfortable or disrespected — that was never my intent.”
You can read the complete account of the women’s accusations here.
BANGALORE: Her joy knew no bounds when she was told in September last year that she was pregnant with twins. But, a few weeks later Jyothi (28, name changed) was jolted when she was told by a gynecologist that one of her twin fetus was growing abnormally …
Seldom is a trip on an airplane free from some type of drama or setback. As passengers, we are usually burdened one way or another before or during the time of our flight. Sometimes we have the unfortunate luck of sitting next to a particularly annoying passenger, and other times we may learn that the plane has a mechanical issue after we’ve been sitting in our seats preparing for takeoff for an hour.
When a really dramatic moment occurs on an airplane, it often gets captured on film by a passenger. The most recent airplane incident occurred when a man caused trouble with a deaf couple and their service dog. At an Orlando airport terminal, a man allegedly punched the pregnant deaf woman in the stomach and then proceeded to punch the service dog in the head.
The part of the incident that was actually filmed was what happened after the alleged man messed with the deaf couple. The pregnant woman’s partner, Matthew Silvay can be seen arguing and angrily signing at the other passenger, Timothy Manley, while the woman urges him to stop and continue on to their seats.
Then the video shows the deaf couple holding up the line when passengers are departing the plane because Silvay is still angry. One of the workers is yelling at Silvay at this point and telling him that the dog is not a person. And as all this is going on Silvay is holding his phone camera in front of the workers and waiting for Manley to get off the plane. The couple can be seen blocking an entryway, causing a lot of disruption amongst the passengers who are trying to board the plane.
And then, when Silvay spots Manley he doesn’t hold back. He takes what appears to be his metal walking cane and hits him right in the head, knocking him down. Meanwhile, the couple’s children can be seen screaming in the background as the incident unfolds.
According to Manley, he pushed the large dog away when it stood up to stretch because his wife has allergies and he didn’t want them to act up on the plane.
“My wife was right next to me and has allergies to dogs, and I had to push it away,” Manley told ABC News, denying that he punched the dog. Evidently, Manley had complained about the dog earlier in the flight but took action when the dog stood up.
According to the report, Manley punched the dog, causing it to yelp. Silvay’s wife, Hazel Ramirez stated that Manley not only punched her in the stomach but he also touched the couple’s children. He evidently knocked them over when he was trying to get away from an angry Silvay.
“They fell and cried so hard,” Ramirez said.
Law enforcement officials were there to greet both parties at the gate but they arrived after the fight broke out.
Ramirez shared that she will testify in court if needed and the FBI is currently investigating what if any charges can be pressed.
Commenters shared their thoughts on the incident…
“Shocking behavior. Worse still it the complete incompetence of the airline and airport. No security or police – in this day and age! Poorly handled, although the woman was doing her best and asked for the police to be called. The deaf man and his partner should be banned from flying as a result of that behavior impacting on other passengers creating a dangerous situation.”
A recent study claims aborting their unborn baby is the only option for pregnant women in some areas of the country and pro-lifers naturally have a response.
A deaf, pregnant woman and her service dog were punched by a 59-year-old man Friday as a Frontier jet landed in Orlando on Friday, the Orlando Sentinel reported.
Police said Timothy Manley was travelling from Colorado Springs, Colo., along with his wife Petrini Manley, 56, and Joshua Manley, 27, all from Gainesville, Florida. The wife complained about being allergic to dogs as the plane descended and then taxied to a gate at Orlando International Airport. The service dog, a Great Dane, then woke up.
Manley then punched the service dog, Zariel. The dog yelped, shook his head, and hid near a seat, according to the report. Manley told police the service dog “took up more space than [he] felt it deserved.”
The 21-year-old woman and her 30-year-old partner, who is also deaf, tried to yell at Manley, the report indicated. Manley then got into the man’s face and punched the woman, who is about 20 weeks pregnant.
Manley continued his obnoxious, entitled behavior, telling police “It took you all long enough to get here,” after two officers arrived, according to the report.
The 30-year-old man tackled Timothy Manley and held him down until police arrived. All people involved in the outburst declined medical treatment, according to the report.
Any criminal charges?
The woman said she plans to prosecute and is willing to testify in court.
Because the altercation happened on a plane, the incident was handed over to the FBI, which is investigating, Michelle Guido, a Orlando Police Department spokeswoman, told the Sentinel.
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, service dogs are defined as animals individually trained to work or perform tasks for someone with a disability. Under the act, emotional support, therapy, comfort, or companion animals are not considered service animals.
Businesses are required to make reasonable accommodations for people with service dogs, the law states.