![]() |
![]() |
|
August 13, 2000
As an elected official and a politician running for re-election, Mr. Foley is correct in responding to the disappointment and frustration within the community. His call for Intracoastal to explain their actions to the public is fine.
This tragedy is not just about Intracoastal, but also about Bethesda Memorial and Boca Raton hospitals and hundreds like them across these United States. This is about Medicare HMO’s dropping out of the business and subjecting the insured to personal turmoil, as they have to switch doctors and maybe even hospitals. It is about a lack of leadership and commitment
Intercostal has proven to be a poor corporate citizen that is unconcerned with our community. My true leadership and compassion in Washington could have averted the tragedy we are now facing.
Of course, Mark will say there is nothing he could have done in Washington, but he would be wrong again. The political process allows for an open discussion of the priorities of each candidate.
In addition to providing adequate funding, Congress should require that hospitals which receive over 40% of their revenue from government (Medicare, Medicaid, Health Care Districs) should have citizen representation on their boards. Not to control them, but to ensure that they keep the citizens who pay the bills and public health needs in mind when make decisions. We can no longer allow providing adequate health care to be solely a corporate decision. It must be a community decision. But Mark would rather posture than debate issues like heath care, gun control and education. Yes Mark, you could have done more. To provide adequate health care, we need to make some changes in Congress.
Jean Elliott Brown May 11, 2000
The ongoing specter of losing services or an entire hospital in West Palm Beach is a terrible thought. Both St Mary’s and Good Samaritan have served the community well and we do not want to see either of them reduced in size or stature. They are one of the largest employers in Palm Beach County, and we do not want to suffer another year looking as losing a major employer. A lot of articles have been written about how we got in this situation, whether it was Intracoastal management, the Board of Trustees, or the doctors or the nurses. I think we should recognize that none of the groups would ever willingly harm either hospital. In looking for the cause, we should look further at the state of the entire health care system in America. Medicare for the elderly and Medicaid for the poor are large complex programs which were designed many years ago and although Congress has tried to correct flaws around the edges, there are fundamental structural problems that need to addressed in light of today's health care system. For instance, Medicare reimbursement rates were set years ago separately for each county in America. Maybe that was ok when medical care was more labor intensive and it reflected differences in labor rates. Today, however, medical care uses more equipment, which costs the same everywhere, doctors and patients are mobile across county lines, and modern drugs are a preferred method of treatment. All of these factors would argue for the same rate everywhere. Medicare rules are so complex that they are three times larger than the IRS Tax Code. The program is also affected by the interplay of nursing homes with hospitals. When Congress wanted to cut the growth in Medicare, they cut many things such as portions of home-health care, or nursing home care. Since the need and expectation of service still remains, it will pop up somewhere else in the system, such as in the hospitals where care is more expensive, but covered for the patient. Likewise, Medicaid has similar problems. In addition to which, as Congress tries to get more people coverage, it raises the minimum qualifying income and simultaneously, people learn how to lower their incomes to qualify for long term health care under Medicaid. This problem will continue to grow until we establish tangible and competitive long-term health care insurance programs that people will buy. So the truth is that the problems of Good Sam and St. Mary’s are really just the visible evidence of a national health care system which needs a serious overhaul. We need to address the entire system, not just a piece. We also need to use the strengths of America, our competitive businesses and insurance companies, to complement our government objectives. In this way, we can continue to innovate without creating an enourmous bureaucratic government burden. Of course, we also need to provide the safeguards to make sure that people are being taken care of, given the information to make intelligent choices, and the government is not taken advantage of by scam artists.
Jean Elliott Brown
In an article for the Wellington Town Crier on March 30, 2000, Mark Foley makes statements that appear to directly contradict his voting record. This leads us to conclude that there must be two Mark Foleys loose in the world. One is in Florida taking positions compatible with his constituency. The other is in Washington becoming the kind of politician who wallows in special interest money, travel junkets, and the Washington way of life. Based on his financial disclosures and his voting record, it seems that Mr. Foley votes to please his special interests not the interest of the 16th district.
According to "Florida Foley," he supports stricter gun control measures and advocates background checks.
But, Mark Foley in Washington voted to allow assault weapons (HR 125, 3/22/96), voted not to close the gun show loophole (Roll Call 1234, 6/18/99), and has taken thousands of dollars in well-timed campaign contributions from the National Rifle Association.
"Florida Foley" says he supports seniors and that " every senior needs to be aware that we’re going to stand by their benefits as promised". But "Washington Foley" is breaking that promise by voting to cut seniors’ Social Security and Medicare by 270 million dollars and weakening nursing home standards. He has taken over $100,000 in contributions from insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and private nursing home facilities. (Roll Call 1743, 10/26/95, HR 3064, 10/28/99)
"Florida Foley" says he is against school vouchers and "does not approve of vouchers".
But "Washington Foley" voted not once- not twice-but SEVEN times FOR school vouchers (Roll Call 1763, 11/2/95; Roll Call 1512,1513, 10/9/97; Roll Call 1569, 11/4/97;Roll Call 2119,4/30/98; Roll Call 2411, 8/6/98; Roll Call 1521,10/21/99)
The content of this article clearly displays the hypocrisy of Mr. Foley. It’s not bad enough that Mr. Foley would contradict himself so completely, but he clearly thinks we won’t notice! Do not be fooled by the "Florida Foley," for it is the "Washington Foley" that makes the difference. As our mother’s always taught us, "Actions speak louder than words."
Jean Elliott Brown |
|
Home | Contribute | Issues | Compare | Insider | FoleyWatch | Video | Soundtrack | Volunteer | Story | |
|
jeanelliottbrown.com: Site Search Privacy Policy Legal Notices Webmaster Web Design Criteria |
|
Copyright © 2000 Jean Elliott Brown for Congress All rights reserved |