By Woodrow Wilcox

When my congressman held a “town hall” meeting in my hometown, I attended. The congressman read my question from a card on which I had written, “Are you aware of the problem of Medicare not helping senior citizens to pay for ‘SELF-ADMINISTERED DRUGS’ when they are admitted to a hospital and how much money this is costing senior citizens?”

The congressman was honest and said that he did not know of it. I asked for permission to approach him and hand him a four article flyer that I had prepared to help him understand the problem of SELF-ADMINISTERED DRUGS. When I handed it to him, I explained the problem briefly.

“Basically, the federal government has written new definitions of when a senior citizen should be classified as an ‘in-patient’ or ‘out-patient’ when in a hospital. In some cases, the senior can be ‘in-patient’ for most purposes, but ‘out-patient’ for some purposes. The difference is that Medicare Part A will help the senior with the cost of medications when the senior is an ‘in-patient’, but Medicare Part B will not help the senior with the cost of medications when the senior is an ‘out-patient’. In addition to this, it is difficult or impossible to get a Medicare Part D prescription drug plan to help the senior to pay any of the costs of SELF-ADMINISTERED DRUGS when they are in a hospital. This problem costs millions of senior citizens billions of dollars per year. I had hoped to bring a client of our insurance agency who lives in this town here tonight to tell you about Medicare not helping her with a bill for SELF-ADMINISTERED DRUGS which totals over $1,500. But, she is ill and could not come tonight,” I told the congressman.

The congressman asked me to help our client to connect with his office to give the particulars of her problem with Medicare so that he could check if he could help her. I did that. I appreciate the congressman’s interest and his listening to my concern. But, there are two important points that I did not tell the congressman because I wanted to be brief and polite.

The first point is that I never had a senior citizen client who came to me with a SELF-ADMINISTERED DRUG problem until 2010. I did not understand what it was because it was new. I phoned Medicare and asked about this problem and its origin. I never could get a straight answer. Finally, between Christmas 2010 and New Year 2011, I phoned some billing supervisors at local hospitals and asked them what they could tell me about this problem. I was surprised and angered by their answers.

According to the hospital billing supervisors with whom I spoke, Barrack Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder were responsible for the problem of seniors being hit by big bills for SELF-ADMINISTERED DRUGS when they go to a hospital. It seems that Eric Holder started writing new definitions of “in-patient” and “out-patient” knowing that the new definitions would cost seniors and enrich pharmaceutical companies by billions of dollars per year. The doctors and hospitals had to file claims in accordance with the new rules and definitions or Medicare would pay nothing.

For years I had warned seniors that sooner or later the federal government would change rules to shift some of the costs of health care back onto senior citizens in order to save money for the federal government. The problem of SELF-ADMINISTERED DRUGS was created by the Obama administration for that very reason. So, it seems that the Obama administration started hurting senior citizens even before “Obamacare” became law.

Some people claim that the “Obamacare” law did not affect seniors. That is false. In late July 2012, the Government Accounting Office published results of its two year study of “Obamacare”. The report stated that “Obamacare” would take away over SEVEN HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS of Medicare benefits from senior citizens to spend that money on other things and other people.

The other thing that I did not say to my congressman because I wanted to be brief and polite was in response to something that he said at the meeting. Several people asked him about the problems of “Obamacare” and his vote for “Obamacare”. He said that there were problems with health care before “Obamacare” and that the law was not perfect but eventually would work.

The congressman’s remark evades the main point about the problems with “Obamacare”. The law was passed irresponsibly and undemocratically. Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic Party leader in the House of Representatives, told the Members of Congress that they could learn what was in the “Obamacare” bill after they voted on it. She would not let the Congress or the public have the time to read and comment on the final bill before the vote. That was very undemocratic don’t you think?

A congressman who votes for a bill without reading it or taking comments from the public who read it is acting irresponsibly. It is as irresponsible as a man who signs a contract to obligate himself and his family without reading the contract before signing it.

In my view, my congressman, and every other congressman and senator who voted for the “Obamacare” law without reading the final version or insisting that the public have a chance to read and comment on it ACTED IRRESPONSIBLY. They acted irresponsibly because they are irresponsible. They don’t take their temporary job of representing the people seriously and for that reason THE PUBLIC CAN NOT AND SHOULD NOT TRUST THEM WITH THAT POWER EVER AGAIN. THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO VOTED FOR “OBAMACARE” SIMPLY CAN NOT BE TRUSTED WITH POWER. THEY ARE IRRESPONSIBLE.

What if a congressman voted for a bill without reading it first and the bill contained special language that favors certain lobbyists and special interests but costs the general public billions of dollars? Guess what! The June 11, 2012 edition of the Wall Street Journal reported that new information about the push for “Obamacare” revealed that Obama made a “back room deal” with major prescription drug companies. In exchange for those big drug companies lobbying for “Obamacare”, Obama agreed to some special provisions in the “Obamacare” bill that would enrich the big drug companies at the expense of the public that needs and buys prescription drugs. That is the type of Chicago style of politics “back room deal” that lobbyists and corrupt politicians love.

What if a congressman voted for a bill without reading it first and the bill contained language which re-established slavery in our country? Guess what! Parts of the “Obamacare” law did re-establish slavery in our country. It is not the same slavery of the past. It is a new slavery or “forced servitude”. And the Obama administration is using that language to enslave certain people. Here is just one example. A free person can refuse to do work because it violates that free person’s religious beliefs or conscience. A slave is not allowed to refuse to do work for any reason. Under “Obamacare”, the Obama administration is treating prolife doctors, nurses, and other health care workers and pharmacists like slaves by not allowing them to refuse to perform abortions or help in the sale of abortion causing drugs. The Obama administration uses the “Obamacare” law to threaten prolife citizens if they do not cooperate with abortion. To that degree, these prolife workers have become the slaves of the federal government under the Obama administration.

Bluntly stated, here is my point: You should not trust any Member of Congress who will not insist that you, and all other voters, be allowed a chance to read and comment on a proposed law BEFORE CONGRESS VOTES ON IT. An emergency such as an attack on our country could be an exception to this rule. If your congressman or senator does not want to hear from the public after being elected, then they think that they are above the average citizen and must not be trusted with any government power ever again.

I hope that now everyone will realize that every Member of Congress and every U. S. Senator who voted for “Obamacare” is irresponsible and must not be trusted with power ever again.

© Woodrow Wilcox 2014