Glenn Beck: Doc getting grief from government


Related Story


State Orders Dr. John Muney to Stop Treating Patients for $79/month


GLENN: When it comes to healthcare, do they want to fix the problem? Dr. Muney is a doctor here in the New York area. John Muney is his name. You are originally from Turkey, aren't you, Doctor?

DR. MUNEY: Yes, I'm from Turkey.

GLENN: How long have you lived here in the United States?

DR. MUNEY: Since 1975.

GLENN: Since 1975, you've been a doctor here since 1975?

DR. MUNEY: Yes.

GLENN: And you have a regular practice, and it's a thriving practice.

DR. MUNEY: Yes.

GLENN: How many patients do you have?

DR. MUNEY: Well, in our practice now we have about 7,000 to 8,000 patients.

GLENN: Okay, 7,000 to 8,000 patients, and you decided that there's too much waste, it cost too much money, just in your overhead. Tell me a little about the frustration of being a doctor in America today.

DR. MUNEY: Well, the system, it's the wrong system. That's what we have here. It really is mostly to paperwork, waste, bureaucracy, fraud, abuse and that's why we're paying about 50% increase in our healthcare premiums.

GLENN: Say that again. What do you mean we're paying 50% in healthcare premiums?

DR. MUNEY: I mean, the system, the way it's set up, it lends itself to abuse, waste, bureaucracy. And if we were paying $2.4 trillion in healthcare, I think $1.2 trillion is waste. It can be reduced. It can be eliminated.

GLENN: And how is that?

DR. MUNEY: Well, I mean, you know, the way the system's set up, the patient/doctor relationship is broken. People are trying to make as much as possible the way -- for example, the doctors are seeing the patients as a cash cow now, some of them. So they try to do as much, as many tests as possible, as many surgeries as possible. The hospital bills are enormous. $100,000, $200,000, $300,000 bills are common now. And this goes on and on.

GLENN: Okay. How come they can do this?

DR. MUNEY: Well, the regulations, the system itself allows them to do it.

GLENN: In what way? The insurance companies because it's a third party payor?

DR. MUNEY: The insurance company, it's a third party system and, you know, they are trying to do some job but because of the -- it takes certain amount of money to run the system and plus, the patients come to you, they say, "Doc, I have this insurance, do as many tests as possible." And the doctor said, "Well, okay, I'll do it because I'm getting paid. And the hospital does the same thing. And the cost keeps escalating.

GLENN: So in other words, this is -- and I've had this happen a million times. The doctor will say, "Does your insurance cover X, Y, and Z?" You'll say no. Then they will sit there and think for about 30 seconds and they will say, okay, we'll use this instead. That's where the waste comes in. They don't have to do some of the things that they --

DR. MUNEY: No, they don't have to.

GLENN: And would you include some of that waste in the paperwork, you know, to guard against litigation, et cetera, et cetera, and the insurance for the doctors on litigation?

DR. MUNEY: Oh, definitely, there's no question about it. I think in my estimation is the cost of our practice to our healthcare system's about 10% minimum.

GLENN: Okay. So you're talking now about 60% of what we all pay for healthcare is between waste and guarding against litigation?

DR. MUNEY: That's true. I strongly believe it. I believe that we can reduce our healthcare costs by 2/3 easily.

GLENN: Okay. Now so you know, America, I'm just talking -- this is just one man's opinion. He's just a doctor here in New York.

DR. MUNEY: Yes.

GLENN: But he got sick of it and he decided that he was going to charge all of his patients $79. You weren't going to take any more healthcare, you weren't going to do -- no insurance. Just $79 every month and you can go see him -- you can go -- your patients can come see you as many times in that month as they needed.

DR. MUNEY: That's true. They can come, for $79 there's unlimited preventive checkups and includes the bloodwork, sonogram, x-ray, whatever they need at that time.

GLENN: And if somebody gets sick and they need to see you five times in a month, they only would have paid you $79 and there was no, there was no office pay or anything like that. It was just $79 and you can come as many times as you want.

DR. MUNEY: Yes, that's true. As long as they are coming for preventive checkups, yes.

GLENN: What does that mean?

DR. MUNEY: Well, my original idea was to charge $79 flat rate every month for unlimited visits but unfortunately the state stepped in saying that if I do this, I'm doing insurance business.

GLENN: Okay.

DR. MUNEY: So they --

GLENN: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. But what I want to go to originally is you said anything for $79 a month, they could see you for anything. That was your original idea?

DR. MUNEY: That was my original idea.

GLENN: Then the state came in and said, "No, that makes you an insurance company and so you can't do that."

DR. MUNEY: That's true.

GLENN: And then the state sent you a letter saying that you couldn't do that.

DR. MUNEY: Yes.

GLENN: And then you came on my program.

DR. MUNEY: Yes.

GLENN: And then they said, "Okay, you can do that; however, you can't charge the $79, it can only be for preventative medicine."

DR. MUNEY: Yes.

GLENN: A checkup, which kind of defeats the purpose. And then you also have to charge them, what is it, $33?

DR. MUNEY: Yes, $33 for sick visit only. If they come in for sick visits, I must charge them $33 because, to cover my overhead costs. That's the law.

DR. MUNEY: Why -- yeah, I know. It's convenient, isn't it?

DR. MUNEY: Yes.

GLENN: How does that help people getting healthcare, who don't have healthcare, how is that helping to have $79 for preventative and if you get sick, you can also pay $33 when the doctor himself says "I don't need to charge the $33"?

DR. MUNEY: That's true.

GLENN: How is that helping?

DR. MUNEY: I mean, it really makes it more difficult for us to charge $33 because then it will increase or administrative costs as well. But I think $79 will cover my costs. That's what I believe, and I wanted to do this but unfortunately in order for me to salvage the program, I still believe it's a good deal, no question about it in my mind. But I had to agree to some kind of compromise.

GLENN: Okay. Have you asked them if, that let's say you go to a restaurant and it's all you can eat for $9.99 if that $9.99 is an insurance program? Have you asked them if that $9.99 for an all you can eat, if you also wanted dessert if they would have to charge an extra $33 for dessert if that would be fair? Have you asked them how do they explain gym membership?

DR. MUNEY: Lawyers, retainers fees, it works on the same principle.

GLENN: What is their response to that?

DR. MUNEY: Well, I haven't -- I never talked face to face with them. We've been only communicating through letters, and my lawyer has contacted them several times and so this is a compromise we chose. I'm hoping that hopefully some legislator will sponsor a bill to change the law and take the primary care out of the insurance business.

GLENN: You know, Texas, South Carolina.

DR. MUNEY: Washington. Washington, the primary care is not under insurance law. They can do it and they are doing it.

GLENN: And is it working out fine for them?

DR. MUNEY: Yes, exactly. I communicated with a couple of doctors from Washington State.

GLENN: Be careful when they get all this stimulus money. I wonder what kind of strings are attached in that. Dr. Muney, I appreciate you very much, sir.

DR. MUNEY: All right. Bye-bye.

GLENN: This is why -- just don't believe them when they say, oh, we're just trying to help out. No, they're not. No, they're not. They're looking for their own power. That's all they're looking for. When they say that they're against giving bonuses to the AIG executives, ask them, do they have a contract? Yes. Is it valid? Yes. In your bailout did you not say that all contracts signed before this date are valid and must be withheld -- must be upheld? Yes. Did you guys in congress write that law? Yes. So it's a valid contract? Yes. You said that if it was signed before a certain date that it was valid? Yes. It would be honored? Yes. You don't believe we can break the union contracts, right? Of course not, no. But this contract with AIG that makes you popular to fight, you can break that one? Yes. So that's like we enforce the law sometimes on the border and sometimes we don't. That means that sometimes this drug law we need to go ahead and enforce but sometimes we don't. That means that sometimes you'll pay a tax penalty if you don't pay your taxes and sometimes you'll be made secretary of the treasury? Yes. Okay, I just want to make sure I understand the rules, which basically means there are no rules... unless you're important or powerful, which is weird because I think that's the way communist Russia used to work. But call me crazy.

It's not just the Twitter mobs, the Leftist extremists and the flagrant fourth-wave feminists who want ICE abolished. As we've seen, there's a growing number of politicians who want to see it as well.

Cue Alejandro Alvarez, who in his 32 years has managed to cultivate his brand as a "serial immigration violator." Alejandro has been deported 11 times. Well, he's facing deportation once again, after allegedly "slashing his wife with a chainsaw." His wife is in recovery and is expected to survive.

RELATED: The cost of unchecked illegal immigration is very real, and very high

Around 3:00 pm last Wednesday, police arrived at Alejandro's. When they arrived, they found Alvarez's wife suffering from "traumatic physical injuries, believed to have been inflicted by a chainsaw." The couple's three children were huddled in fear inside the home. Alejandro's wife was rushed to a nearby trauma center for an emergency surgery.

Alejandro fled the scene of the crime, but was eventually hauled in by police and booked under "suspicion of attempted murder, child endangerment, hit and run, and grand theft auto."

Sounds like the kind of guy who should be in our country illegally, right?

ICE spokeswoman Lori Haley noted that "Immigration officers have lodged a detainer against Alvarez, requesting that local authorities notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement before his release to allow them to take the man into custody."

This is the new reality.

This is the new reality. The immigration agency has to ask for permission, to file requests, to have illegal immigrants who are guilty of crimes dealt with. Luckily for Alejandro, Los Angeles is a sanctuary city, so maybe he'll get another pass and be back on the streets in no time.

The Purple Heart is reserved for those wounded or killed during battle. Awarded by the President, the medal has George Washington's image right there on the front of it. Make no mistake, it is reserved for heroes. True heroes. Men and women who've faced death and still persevered. Soldiers who fought in battle at the cost of their limbs, their lives, or their inner peace. John F. Kennedy earned a Purple Heart for his heroism as a gunboat pilot in 1944. John McCain received one for, well, we all know his horrific story. Colin Powell. Roughly one million Purple Heart medals have been awarded to veterans, all of whom were determined to have fought valiantly, with courage and heart.

RELATED: An FBI Agent Was Dismissed From the Mueller Probe. What Happened?

So it was a bit of a head-scratcher to hear comments from Democratic Representative Steve Cohen from Tennessee and self-appointed "Leader in Effort to #ImpeachTrump." During a House Oversight Committee hearing questioning Peter Strzok, Cohen said, perplexingly, that Strzok deserves a Purple Heart. You know, because he's injured by all those mean text messages that HE sent?

As we've seen, other than Cohen's fanboy praise, Strzok hasn't gotten off easy. Thankfully. The Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General wrote: "We did not have confidence that Strzok's decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the Midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the [Anthony] Weiner laptop was free from bias."

Lack of confidence. I believe that's one of the criteria for a different medal. Not a Purple Heart, though. Sorry, Strzok, you'll have to get your trophy elsewhere.

Time mgazine is back at it again, reporting the real news, doing the proper journalism. One of their latest articles is sure to earn them a Pulitzer. Surely. The article is titled, "Women Are Buying Up Plan B Because They're Terrified of the Future Supreme Court."

Here's how the article opens:

Within hours of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's retirement announcement last month, Emily Hauser was standing at a drugstore counter asking a pharmacist for two packages of Plan B. At age 53, she didn't need the emergency contraception pills — in fact, she wasn't sure who would, or when. But Hauser bought them anyway.

RELATED: Observations of an Irishman: Lessons from the abortion referendum

I like that the article sets up Kennedy's retirement as an apocalyptic event. A recurring theme in the mainstream media, now that I think of it, especially lately. Here's the gist of it:

Across the country, Americans are stockpiling emergency contraception in light of Justice Kennedy's retirement and President Donald Trump's Monday nomination of Brett Kavanaugh. The nation's highest court is on its way to having a conservative majority, making threats against Roe v. Wade seem more dire than ever.

A good article includes backstory. History. The context. Here's what Time had to say about the sudden influx—some would say panic—in birth control:

To understand the interest in buying up Plan B, you need to brush up on Roe v. Wade. Some background: The court handed down the 7-2 decision in 1973, confirming that a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy is covered by the Fourteenth Amendment. Progress has been rocky since then.

Of course they reduce the issue to a series of strawman fallacies.

Ah, yes. Of course they reduce the issue to a series of strawman fallacies. At this point, it's impossible for those inflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome, and now Kavanaugh Derangement Syndrome, to have a civil conversation. They certainly aren't going to budge in their opinion. Our main goal, obviously, is to connect to them as fellow human beings, living in the same chaotic world, and, hey, maybe along the way they'll admit that, maybe, they're a little more biased and deranged than they previously realized.

If all you knew about American politics came from The New York Times, CNN, The Washington Post, or MSNBC, you'd think that a "Blue wave" is about to swamp the country, with hip, millennial geniuses like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez surfing the crest of the wave. In fact, you would already think Ocasio-Cortez is the greatest hope for America since Barack Obama.

America is a very large country, and reality is usually more complex than the media lets on. But, since the media already has their narrative and superstar Ocasio-Cortez set for this November, there's no room for another young, minority, female, child of immigrants, political outsider, from the ultimate blue-wave state of California, named Elizabeth Heng. Well, there probably would be room for a story like that, except that she's a conservative.

RELATED: Democratic Socialism spun as 'innovative, millennial-friendly' — here's the reality

Thirty-two-year-old Elizabeth Heng is running for Congress against Democrat Jim Costa, in California's 16th district. It's been 40 years since a Republican won in that district.

In the early 1980s, Heng's parents fled the violence in Cambodia and immigrated to the U.S. In 2008, after graduating from Stanford where she was student-body president, Heng opened several cell-phone stores with her brothers in the central San Joaquin Valley. Running her own business and managing 75 employees opened her eyes to a not-so-dirty secret about capitalism trying to survive the virus of progressivism. She says, "I saw firsthand how government regulations impacted businesses negatively. I constantly felt that from Washington, D.C., and Sacramento, they were saying that I was everything wrong with our country, when all I was doing was creating jobs."

That's when she decided to venture to Washington, D.C., where she worked for six years learning the ins and outs of legislation and campaigning. She ended up working as a director for President Trump's inauguration ceremony, a job she managed while also finishing her MBA at Yale.

Fiscal responsibility isn't quite as sexy-sounding as free college for everyone.

One of the biggest lessons she learned working in Washington became the platform she is now running for office on: fiscal responsibility. She says, "In a family or a business, we don't suddenly act surprised when a budget comes up for the year. We get it done."

What a concept.

Still, fiscal responsibility isn't quite as sexy-sounding as free college for everyone. So, don't expect Elizabeth Heng to replace Ocasio-Cortez as the media darling anytime soon.