SHAME ON MCCAIN FOR THESE DECEPTIONS Deception 1: McCain post on his Website; archived here post-election by me (to preserve for study this example of the government getting away from the people). This text is near the bottom of McCain's page: "MYTH: Some Claim That Under John McCain's Plan, Those With Pre-Existing Conditions Would Be Denied Insurance." Here McCain (or his site writers from the insurance industry) is simply using deceptive language to make it sound like an insurer would not be able to turn you down for a pre-existing condition. But McCain would have kept the precise pre-existing-condition-screened system in place. Currently, in many states, a "high-risk-pool" is set up to cover some of the people who can't pass pre-existing condition screens. These plans can run up to $23,000. or more a year per person (as in CT), they often have ridiculous exclusions (e.g., paying at most $75,000 a year in your medical bills and with a waiting list in California, paying only half of out-of-state emergency treatment in MO), and they keep many people with pre-existing conditions ineligible. McCain keeps this precise system. (On his site, he has renamed "high-risk-pools" as "guaranteed acceptance plans".) McCain's intent is to fool you, and it is clear he is working with marketing-types in the insurance industry to come up with language that will fool you. Under McCain, you still pay much more for insurance, and may fall through the gap entirely, if you have or get a pre-existing condition. McCain's so called MYTH statement would only be a myth if stretched to "those With Pre-Existing Conditions Would Be Denied the ability to get any Insurance at all". And, this would be very expensive high-risk-pool insurance (up to $23,000 a year per person), that you might not be able to afford. And further, with the current set of high risk pools, 35 states of 50+D.C. have some sort of big gap that misses some people. Those have to be ironed out in each and every state. (And further, massive funding for filling those gaps for people with pre-existing conditions would have to come from somewhere. And McCain actually melts down the limited current funding, with his "across state lines" provision.) Deception 2: In the first presidential debate, and then the first vice-presidential debate, we have a big misportrayal of the Obama plan as a government takeover. For example, in the VP debate, Palin said that Obama’s plan would be "universal government run" health care and that health care would be "taken over by the feds." However, as factcheck.org indicates, that's not the case at all. Obama’s plan would not replace or remove private insurance, or require people to enroll in a public plan. My favorite goofy little deception by McCain (nothing to do with insurance-- but it's cute) -- the "3 million dollar overhead projector for a planetarium" Obama earmark: As I guessed during the debate, and other science people may have guessed, that turns out to be a replacement of a 40-year old projector of the night sky at the major Chicago planetarium, the Adler. (factcheck.org on Adler Planetarium projector). In my book, over the next 40 years, about two million kids, young adults, and some adults would have learned a lot of science from it, had the earmark been approved. (I learned a lot, from the one at the Hayden in NYC. And I now have a Ph.D. in science!) I frankly am not sure if the misstatements are from the McCain marketing people and approved by McCain because he simply isn't intelligent enough (though despite class rank 5th from last at Naval Academy, note his IQ tested at 133 (top few percent) on an occasion, but again note weak analytical (science, math, engineering) performance)*, or because he doesn't mind making gross deceptions. Either way, we have a problem. "Straight talk"? My A**! [ 10/20/08: As the transparent pretense of being a "straight talker" and "maverick for the people" has failed, without as much as a segue, McCain is now presenting himself perhaps more honestly as a vulgar and rabble-rousing old codger with seven houses, excellent secure health insurance (and enough money to pay cash for healthcare as well), who doesn't want to spread the wealth (or security) around, and is determined to keep the increased disparity of wealth and loss of economic security that has come upon the country relentlessly over the last 30 years.] [ 10/21/08: On TV today, McCain said some thing about Biden saying Obama would bring the country into crisis in the first 6 months in office. While we presume that he's just going for the National- Enquirer-reader vote, it has crossed my mind that senility may be making its first public appearance. (Here is exactly what all was said. Judge for yourself. Note the even more ridiculous and devious Palin version.) ] * Although an IQ in the top few percent is higher than some would guess based on the class rank, the IQ is not as high as I'd like my President's IQ to be, and the math/science/engineering (similar skills to economic) deficiency in a time of economic crisis seems particularly ill-suited. Further, his dogmatic "get the government out of it even if I don't understand the mechanisms" approach further suggests an inadequate analytical grip on economic things, and a lack of the trait mental-skills specialists call "cognitive complexity". Factcheck.org on both candidates on Presidential debate # 3. [Note: factcheck.org isn't perfect, but it's stilll pretty good. Notably, I find they are good with exact facts, but sometimes miss conspicous aspects when economic or other analysis is involved.] CALIFORNIA INSURER WRITES DOCTORS ASKING THEM TO LOOK FOR UNREPORTED PRE-EXISTING-CONDITIONS IN PATIENTS (So They Don't Have to Pay Claims on Pre-existing Conditions) See story here. CONNECTICUT ATTORNEY GENERAL POSTING ABOUT ASSURANT HEALTH INSURANCE DENYING CLAIMS IN BAD FAITH, CLAIMING A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION: See the story, here. Silly People Looking for a Too-Good-To-Be-True Bargain Get Just What They Deserve Ah, the silly citizens. When they need non-group health insurance, and have been completely healthy, they buy this cheap health insurance that is cheap based on keeping all the unhealthy people away. It's really cheap, maybe $900. a year. It's a wasteful product, being that it only pays out 55%-75% in claims of the premiums paid in. But they've got really cheap rates. They see "Harry and Louise" (ad 2), and they feel really good about their really cheap insurance. But then, if they do get sick (which is what they had insurance for), they wind up with much higher rates, or no insurance at all So, collectively, we are morons looking for a bargain buy getting insurance that keeps away unhealthy people. And when we get sick, that insurance, that keeps away sick people, says "good luck, buddy", and we get what we deserve. Video: Economic Journalist Peter Gosselin and others discuss his book High Wire, about the increased risk of sudden financial catastrophes to families in America due to health insurance and other reasons. Frontline with Full Video on 5 Country's Systems Documentary Showing how well the current system is working for the working poor . The people followed in this documentary are all in the lower-middle and working-poor class. I find it a flaw that they missed the more well to do middle class, which is also at high risk. Though the better-off portion of the middle class has a lower likelihood of having no care or far inferior care most of the time than the working poor, the system still leaves no care and inferior care all too likely. And further, it gets combined with the likelihood of losing say $600,000 worth of savings all at once. (The working poor simply don't have that much in assets to lose.) American Prospect Special Report on Universal Health Care--May, 2008 . The following articles strike me as particularly lucid: Ezra Klein on two of the major proposals and their variants, Marcia Angell on the Massachusetts reform, and Anthony Wright on the California attempt. Dear John: Norm the statistician here. I live in New York State. On 10/16/08, David Letterman wondered what the h*** are you doing by appointing a charismatic, but inadequately knowledgeable and inadequately experienced woman as your V.P. You are 73, and if you happen to die before 77, she would become president, and have to deal with very complicated issues. I am worried about that, but I am also worried about you driving me, a middle class person, into poverty if I do get sick and wind up with a pre-existing condition. You have proposed a meltdown of all the protections I have. It's not that my tax rate on my income over $250,000 a year will become 4% higher if I happen to become rich, like Joe the Plumber is worried about, but rather that I will be wiped out entirely if I happen to become sick. Like David Letterman, I ask what the h*** are you doing?? Sincerely, --Norm the statistician, 10/17/08. 10/24/08: Plans for government aid to Insurance Companies (besides AIG) in the works Due to Financial Crisis!(According to several guests on PBS Lehrer NewsHour). Aid to more Insurance Companies??? The very same entities that won't insure people with pre-existing conditions in the U.S., and lobby for keeping able to keep not insuring them, when no other industrialized country allows the non-insurance of people due to pre-existing conditions? The Insurance Companies NOW HAVE A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION (near bankruptcy), AND WANT US TO INSURE THEM? The Insurance Companies want help from us??? IF THERE IS TO BE ANY JUSTIICE AT ALL, IN LIGHT OF THIS, UNIVERSAL-COVERAGE-TYPE PRE-EXISTING CONDITION REFORM MUST BE PASSED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF A NEW PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS! Outside advertising:

*OBAMA and McCAIN: Does the Plan of Either Get Rid of the Pre-Existing-Conditions Mess?: Short Answer: Obama, yes, since his plan calls for exactly that. (That is, it calls for not allowing insurance companies to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions, and further sets up an optional-to-enroll federally-organized set of private insurance company policies that will not discriminate.) We may need to allow extra time, however, due to the current unexpected deregulatory banking system meltdown, and consequential moderate to severe recession. (And of course, there needs to be a large Democratic majority to get the legislation to pass Congress. Further, it is possible the insurance industry will organize another "Harry and Louise" campaign to scare the less sophisticated folks, and will scare enough of them to block the plan.) McCain, definitely no, his plan keeps, and in fact worsens in many states, insurer right to discriminate for pre-existing conditions. And in fact, his exact plan in fact calls for a complete MELTDOWN of protections for pre-existing conditions. * Emergency note added 10/4/08: I've just noticed this: [McCain written proposal with hint of 'another meltdown' implications by Nobel-Prize winning economist Paul Krugman]. Here is the original article in Contingencies, where the quote, in full context, is at the bottom of the first column of acrobat page 3 (journal page 30). [If you read the rest of the article, including paragraphs right before the quote, and understand the meltdown mechanism described below in this box, you see that the plan attempts things to work a certain way (extend current state high-risk pools to provide affordable insurance to those with pre-existing conditions in all states), while at the same time preventing that (by destroying even current inadequate high-risk pool funding mechanism). This could only work if there is new massive Federal government funding to insure all of those with pre-existing conditions. The funding is massive because people with pre-existing conditions use far more in medical services--that's why insurers, unless forced by regulation, do not insure them.] The text of the McCain article is also available in this[Factcheck.org note about McCain plan containing my McCain quoted text but MISSING the realization of how this could cause a meltdown of the insurance sytem]. This is what McCain wrote, in Sept/Oct issue of Contingencies, a journal of the American Academy of Actuaries: McCain: I would also allow individuals to choose to purchase health insurance across state lines, when they can find more affordable and attractive products elsewhere that they prefer. Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation. Consumer-friendly insurance policies will be more available and affordable when there is greater competition among insurers on a level playing field. You should be able to buy your insurance from any willing provider—the state bureaucracies are no better than national ones. Nationwide insurance markets that ensure broad and vigorous competition will wring out excess costs, overhead, and bloated executive compensation. [End quote of McCain. Available in full context[here.] And, on 10/5/08, the same idea still on the McCain WebSite:Families should be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines. And reiterated in the 10/7/08 (2nd) and 10/15/08 (3rd) Presidential debates, McCain oblivious to the meltdown. (No decent advisors familiar enough with the issues to point it out? Or all advisors in the pockets of the insurance companies?) This is how the meltdown: Mechanism 1: Loss of whatever individual-policy protections currently exist in each state: The McCain proposal would defeat each and every of the 50 states' regulations on individual (i.e. non-employer) health insurance. Those regulations don't work that well in most of the states -- the system IS broken -- but allowing insurance to be purchased in one state using the rules of any other state defeats every protection that any state may have tried to set up. In particular, I am afraid that for people with pre-existing conditions in the community-rated and modified-community-rated states of NY, NJ, MA, VT, ME, only very sick people will be buying insurance in those states, and rates may climb to $100,000 or $200,000 a year per sick person. Further, I am afraid of an implosion of the high-risk-pools (maverick McCain has renamed the very same things as "Guaranteed Access Plans") due to loss of subsidy from pre-existing-screened individual plans. (To find those states, go to this Kaiser table, and look for where the "Financed through insurer assessments" column is "Yes". I count 28 states.) What will happen in those states is that people with no pre-existing conditions will buy cheaper insurance in states that do not have a high risk pool, since the lack of the assessment will make the insurance cheaper there. Then, the high risk pools in all of those states (with pools) will lose those subsidies, and the premiums may need to rise to $60,000 or $100,000 a year to cover the medical costs of the only-sick people in those plans. [In the Contingencies article McCain does say he would provide Federal assistance to each state to make the high-risk-pools affordable. However, the cost is massive--that's why insurers don't insure people with pre-existing conditions without regulations forcing them to (such regulations as Obama proposes). And that cost becomes yet more massive as McCain's proposal of removing the employer health insurance incentive pushes more people into individual plans. (Individual plans without regulation do not have the risk pooling of large employer plans that pool the sick and healthy together.) Note that there is no mention of Federal assistance for the state high-risk pools on the McCain Site: Health Care Section page, because apparently it was realized that the funding would be too massive. Kind of interestingly, months ago, when he did have that as a vaguely defined part of his plan, an article in a deregulation-ideology magazine went after him, for not realizing how many hundreds of billions of dollars, and how big a government program, that would be. So any way of funding insurance for people with pre-existing conditions is out of the McCain plan. But the destruction of the limited current funding and pre-existing-conditions protections are in.] How the meltdown, Mechanism 2: De-employerization leading to removal of risk-pooling from state small-group regulations, without adding compensatory risk-pooling regulations on individual policies. That is, McCain removes tax incentive (full employer tax deduction) for employers to provide health insurance, and replaces it with a partial individual incentive ($2500 per adult tax credit). With appropriate regulations, de-employerization is a good thing, untying everyone from the riduculous entanglement of job and insurance. However, currently most states have some reasonable form of control on how much employee pre-existing-conditions can raise rates on small-group pools, which are much stronger than the control on individual policies. (To see this, check the several Kaiser state Small Group Protections tables, including Kaiser small-group rate restrictions, and compare to the several individual group protections tables, such as Kaiser individual rate restrictions. Thus, McCain pushes everyone into the less-regulated individual market, and further, as in reason 1 above, smashes even those individual regulations and high-risk-pools. This results, precisely, in people, whenever they have serious pre-existing conditions, having no insurance, or insurance that costs $50,000 to $100,000 a year per person. Thus, a McCain Deregulatory Meltdown in Health Insurance will Occur Unless Someone Stops Him! NOTE: I do not believe McCain is aware of this. (It is clear his health insurance proposals are dictated by the health insurance industry, because many companies in that industry have a business model of making a nice profit by selling insurance to people who are very healthy.) However, we simply must have a president who is analytically powerful enough to be able to tell who is advising with good advice, and who is advising with advice that is terrible for the people but great for a special interest. Additional INDEPENDENT CONFIRMATIONS of the Health-Insurance Meltdown Mechanism of McCain: The 3 health policy experts on the Web MD "Reality Check" page are a little reserved, and have not ventured to use my word "MELTDOWN" on the McCain plan, but two of the three, Robert Lazewski and Karen Davis, are pretty direct about the deregulatory nightmare it will cause to people with pre-existing conditions, by my mechanisms and others. [Incidentally, if you check experts Pauly or Laszewski, they give cost estimates of Obama virtual-universal coverage of $100 billion to $200 billion a year, though Obama has said $60 billion a year. Even with the higher numbers, the GDP is $14 trillion, that is around 1% of GDP. We spend 15% of GDP already on health care. We've just tossed a little over a $trillion at the banks and insurance companies for the financial crisis. For chrissakes, let's spend that 1% to cover the 1/6 of our population without health insurance, before God punishes us for our selfishness with a genuine depression!] [Another point the experts above make is McCain's plan pushes everyone into the individual insurance system, currently the least efficient part of the health insurance system, where in particular the "payout rate": the amount of money in claims paid for each dollar in premium payed in, is only around 70%, compared to around around 90% for employer plans. The reason for the inefficiency of the non-employer plans is the cost of advertising, insurance agents, and the cost of the screening and checking for pre-existing conditions performed by a person at the insurance company called an "underwriter". Once upon a time, I had an an individual policy where the insurer indicated the payout rate as just 65%. (Usually, though, they won't tell you the payout rate even if you ask--it's a business secret, and usually there is no regulation to make them tell you.) Also note, that McCain, by getting now even more insurance companies involved trying to sell you individual policies from all states, will be making individual policies less efficient, with more insurance companies in more states paying to advertise to you and sign up agents, and each little company trying to negotiate rates with each hospital across the country. Apparently McCain is quite happy to be "spreading your wealth around" to the health insurance businesses.] Yet more confirmation of the Danger with McCain's Plan:Columbia Journalism Review. Yet more:American Prospect--Ezra Klein. Besides the potential for an actual catastrophe due to smashing already not-particularly-functional regulations to bits, my comments below apply. Unfortunately, the Clinton proposal was the clearest in terms of getting rid of any pre-existing conditions problems. It was universal coverage, with mandatory participation, pre-existing conditions all covered. Now the Obama plan does not allow insurance companies to exclude pre-existing conditions. However, because coverage is not mandatory (causing a possibility of people not sick now freeloading on the system by not having insurance), the rates may be high (agreeing with me: Krugman, here), or it may turn out to be economically unworkable and not pass the Congress, especially now since the financial meltdown. To leave off the mandating of coverage, as Obama has it, we probably can patch this pretty effectively with no mandate but a 3-year exclusion of pre-existing conditions in cases where there was not 3 years of continuous prior coverage. (Frankly, at that point, for people who do not buy the affordable-at-that-point health insurance, there is much sense in doing away with the Federal law mandating hospitals provide emergency-room treatment, and offering only free euthanasia, though the squeamish may disagree with me.) Since McCain proposes to keep pre-existing condition exclusions on insurance policies, and in fact change very little (his site his a very deceptively worded bit amounting only to that he will try to get the 35 states that have some whopping gap in high risk pools, or no high risk pool at all) to start one. Even if he were magically successful in the 35 states (which have had the gaps in their legislation for 25 years now), the high-risk-pools would continue to be very expensive, with rates for people with pre-existing conditions running up to $25,000 a year per person (exactly as they do now). (10/4/08: Plus the McCain deregulatory health-care-meltdown proposal above.) So Obama, with a large Democratic majority in both houses of Congress would seem like the best chance. (We presume the imperfections in his plan get ironed out by the party and the economists he consults. Though some of Obama's words have not had the ring to me as being from a person particularly understanding economic mechanisms, he is smart enough to be surrounding himself by smart advisors and listening.) Perhaps the meltdown will cause us to be closer to a crisis (yet more uninsured that 46 million, yet more medical bankruptcies), and will have created a mindset permitting more substantial action, giving the impetus for constructive change. Kaiser Table Describing McCain and Obams Health Plans: Kaiser Table. NOTE: I have put the Kaiser table up because it summarizes what the candidates say they would do, presumably in a less biased fashion. (If anything, we may suspect a bias towards the health insurance industry. Kaiser-Permanente is a large, non-profit health insurer. Though the profit motive is not involved in the form of direct investor profits, company executives and employees might be biased by how their livelihoods will be affected, particularly by fears of their own job loss by a more efficient system.) Further, even if they are trying to be unbiased, they present the proposals without any mention of how those proposals might affect mechanisms, and what kind of problems (or meltdowns) you might have with pre-existing conditions, etc. Hopefully, my own notes here, combined with analysis elsewhere by qualified economists and health economists, will help you figure that out. At the very least, the Kaiser table should make it clear that I'm not making the proposals up! Candidate Postings: Obama On Obama Web Site Health Care Page Consistently, Obama supports not allowing insurers to turn down people because of pre-existing conditions, combined with subsidies to those with lower incomes, combined also with eventual removal of inefficiencies in the hospitalization system. Comment: Because of lack of mandating coverage for everyone, this could be a little more costly than the mandating approach that Hillary Clinton had. McCain From his link: McCain on Health Care. (NOTE: 10/4/08 The McCain health care page keeps changing. Having watched it over time, it is always extraordinarily deceptive -- despite the use of words "Straight Talk" and "Maverick". There is also a completely FALSE assertion that the Obama plan places insurance choices in the hands of government bureaucrats.) Consistently, the postings indicate: (a)The pre-existing-condition screened system will stay in place. (Not stated directly -- but the current gap-filled patchwork of associated state high risk pools -- slyly renamed "guaranteed access plans".) (b)Reliance on high-risk pools in each state, which require some sort of taxation subsidy, or subsidy from other policies remain. McCain changes the name from "high-risk-pool" to "guaranteed access plan"="GAP", and indicates that he will "work with the states" (presumably so each state without a high risk pool comes up with, and pays for from higher state taxes or other financial redistributions, a high risk pool, and the other states with high risk pools also raise taxes for or have indirect financial redistributions for a better high risk pool). (c)There is a change that favoring employer provided insurance in the tax code is eliminated. (This, in itself, is a positive, though McCain doesn't indicate that taxes on people with employer-provided insurance will often be increased to compensate for giving a tax-benefit to people without employer-provided insurance.) However, because of the action of this as a disincentive for employers to provide health insurance, as well as the loss of "pooling of risk" that employer groups provide, this actually can cause a meltdown in the system. (That is, people who are sick -- the ones who really need and use health insurance -- won't be able to get insurance at all, or, if coverable by a high-risk-pool in the state, will pay much more, or would have to pay so much that they can't afford it. ) (d)McCain does indicate that, though the tax-deduction for employer-provided insurance is eliminated, everyone will get a $2500. per adult tax credit to help buy insurance. The problem is, even currently in states with high-risk-pools, people with pre-existing-conditions have to pay up to $24,000. a year per person -- more than 10 times what McCain is offering. But even worse, this $24,000 a year per person policy counts on the maintenance of funding for those high risk pools. And, by causing the meltdown of the high-risk-pool funding system by allowing people to buy insurance policies from whatever state they can get the cheapest rate, that high risk pool rate might jump to $50,000 or $100,000 per person per year. All in all, by maintaining the pre-existing-condition-screened system, the McCain plan will make the health insurance system even more of a jungle than it already is. His plan might conceivably somehow get more people insured, but if so, those will be people who will pass the pre-existing-condition screens of the insurance companies, and don't especially need the insurance. But people who really need the insurance, when they get a "pre-existing condition", will be stuck, and face financial bankruptcy, just as, or worse than, currently. (The medical bankruptcy rate will rise.) And further, as now, many with assets to lose will avoid seeking diagnosis of symptoms they've noticed, for fear that something will be found, which will be a pre-existing condition, and cause inabiity to get insurance in the future. And yet further, though McCain talks about making the system more efficient -- which of course is an important goal -- he is leaving the wasteful inefficiency of the process of people filling out pre-existing conditions forms, and insurers having their "underwriters" checking up on them each time someone applies for a policy, and of insurers challenging claims as pre-existing-based. There can be no reason that McCain is not attacking this inefficiency other than that the Health Insurance Industry has asked him to protect their ability to profit under this system! (No other developed country in the world has such a crazy system! The last to drop such a crazy system was Switzerland, in 1994.) And under McCain, the current system, emergency-room uninsured treatment system , which forces by federal law that emergency rooms give treatment to the sick uninsured, and then cost-shifts to the rest of us the cost of treating those uninsured, stays. [That is, people who show up at the emergency room or doctor who are really poor-- have under a few thousand dollars in assets--get free Medicaid insurance, which in some states is not bad, and that pays the hospital or doctor bill. Those very poor people with Medicaid count in the statistics as insured. They are not included in the 47 million uninsured people. Those 47 million people have either a little or a lot too much in assets to qualify for free Medicaid. Those people will go to the emergency room or hospital and be billed. Those who are billed but have not enough in assets to pay the bills are those whose bills are cost-shifted to us all (in higher insurance premiums and hospital/doctor bills). Those with a fair amount of assets to lose lose those assets, and then, if they still have more bills and somehow do not qualify for free Medicaid, the rest gets cost-shifted to us.] Further, the economy is increasingly requiring that people have less stable jobs: young people may expect to support families with 10 jobs over a lifetime, rather than one or two, as in the golden days. We may need to take jobs that don't offer health insurance, at times, and may need to have extended periods out of work, and may be forced even to retire early as our job categories no longer exist. We need to be able to count on getting health insurance that is reasonably priced at all times, whether we have pre-existing conditions or not at that point. Otherwise, why even bother trying to save at all, since we might lose it all? If we don't save at all, we can just have Medicaid health care, for free, all the time, and not worry about pre-existing conditions. "Leaders whose self-confidence scores are higher than their scores on conceptual complexity tend to be closed; they are idealogues, principled and driven by causes." (p. 192) "Leaders who are low in conceptual complexity trust their intuition, and often are willing to go with the option that presents itself first. Action is preferable to thinking, planning, or searching for more information. Contextrual information is generally classified according to a set of stereotypes; because there is of ten a good fit between this categorization system and the conceptually more simple individual's orientation to politics, the world is highly ordered and structured. It is relatively easy to decide what to do since the individual's closed conceptual system evaluates and transforms any situation into the specified categories." (pp. 196-197)

Who am I? I am Norm Spier, a mathematical statistician who lives in New York State.

If you have any comments, or want to point out an error or oversight, please email me at norm@nastechservices.com


This site is partly supported by donations (with very modest supplementation by advertising revenue).

If you wish to donate viaPaypal, you may use this link:

This page contains (above) information on:

McCain Pre-existing conditions

pre-existing conditions mccain