St. Joan of Arc, pray for Sarah Palin and all of US.
Posted on 08/12/2009 9:36:38 PM PDT by euram
Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these “unproductive” members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.
The President made light of these concerns. He said:
“Let me just be specific about some things that I’ve been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that we don’t, it’s too expensive to let her live anymore....It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything.” [1]
The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled “Advance Care Planning Consultation.” [2] With all due respect, it’s misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.
Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual ... or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility... or a hospice program." [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]
Now put this in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.” [5] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care? As Charles Lane notes in the Washington Post, Section 1233 “addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones.... If it’s all about alleviating suffering, emotional or physical, what’s it doing in a measure to “bend the curve” on health-care costs?” [6]
As Lane also points out:
Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren’t quite “purely voluntary,” as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me, “purely voluntary” means “not unless the patient requests one.” Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that’s an incentive to insist.
Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit “formulation” of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would “place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign,” I don’t think he’s being realistic. [7]
Even columnist Eugene Robinson, a self-described “true believer” who “will almost certainly support” “whatever reform package finally emerges”, agrees that “If the government says it has to control health-care costs and then offers to pay doctors to give advice about hospice care, citizens are not delusional to conclude that the goal is to reduce end-of-life spending.” [8]
So are these usually friendly pundits wrong? Is this all just a “rumor” to be “disposed of”, as President Obama says? Not according to Democratic New York State Senator Ruben Diaz, Chairman of the New York State Senate Aging Committee, who writes:
Section 1233 of House Resolution 3200 puts our senior citizens on a slippery slope and may diminish respect for the inherent dignity of each of their lives.... It is egregious to consider that any senior citizen ... should be placed in a situation where he or she would feel pressured to save the government money by dying a little sooner than he or she otherwise would, be required to be counseled about the supposed benefits of killing oneself, or be encouraged to sign any end of life directives that they would not otherwise sign. [9]
Of course, it’s not just this one provision that presents a problem. My original comments concerned statements made by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens....An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” [10] Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” [11]
President Obama can try to gloss over the effects of government authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his top health care advisors are clear enough. It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.
[1] See http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/president-obama-addresses-sarah-palin-death-panels-wild-representations.html. [2] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf [3] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1); Sec. 1233 (hhh)(3)(B)(1), above. [4] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1)(E), above. [5] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf [6] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html]. [7] Id. [8] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/10/AR2009081002455.html]. [9] See http://www.nysenate.gov/press-release/letter-congressman-henry-waxman-re-section-1233-hr-3200. [10] See http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Where_Civic_Republicanism_and_Deliberative_Democracy_Meet.pdf [11] See http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions.
Do you mean the RNC?
They don’t want anyone real.
I believe that’s part of the reason we got stuck with McCain.
(open primaries too, but that might be a bit OT)
I'm living vicariously through Todd Palin.
;)
He should not have tried to debunk her calling it “death panel”. She came out swinging again. It IS a death panel when government bureaucrats who are exempt from such treatment and given bonuses to increase savings decide children born with special needs are to be denied care. It is probably a good thing that Eunice Kennedy Shriver will not be around to see all those Special Olympics kids being denied basic health care because Obama says NO. And having Trig is a daily reminder of the dangers of Obamacare.
When will Republicans realize that this woman is the real deal?
Oh you are SO lucky Todd isn’t here to read that LOL. I think a lot of guys are living vicariously through Todd Palin :-)
bookmark
Individuals with fishy views will be assigned to the severely disabled category and mercy killed with a minimum of delay.
They mess around with death, which is something she can tar him with mercilessly. Please Obama, don’t get a clue and do something smart like backing off. This is too funny to watch.
"I'm living vicariously through Todd Palin."
Was it Steve Martin in 'The Jerk' that said well, as long as I'm vicariously in there somewhere.
She is not perfect.
She is not the Savior in a dress.
But she is a powerful shining star putting to shame her nominal (please excuse borrowing of term) fellow travelers.
Wow, I love this lady more and more. Chastely, of course!
She is doing everything she said she would do. She could never have done this while serving as Governor. Oh she is SO under the skins of these clowns in Washington D.C. I wonder what Gibby’s response will be tomorrow. The media are all snugly tucked under their Obama shaped blankies, but when they wake up BANG they will get the news of another SMACK DOWN from Sarah Palin. She is basically a woman with nothing to lose, what are they gonna do, file ethics complaints against her, send the brown shirts to her house, I’d like to see them try. She is doing what the GOP should have done a long time ago, go after this Marxist bastard, perhaps if McCain had hit hard against Obama instead of kissing his butt and telling people not to be afraid of him Sarah would be in the White House right now where she belongs
But why? There is a reason that for DECADES Republicans have been moving left.
They are scared shit-less, as they should be.
The MSM/DNC/Hollywood/Academia/Judiciary War Room is omnipresent. They have absolutely destroyed anyone on the right, and their families. Destroyed livelihoods, careers, reputations.
Just look at what the War Room has done to average Americans in 2 short weeks.....we are racist, KKK, mobs, trash, militia members, scary, dumb, and unAmerican.
Until the media complex is destroyed....we are doomed.
The goons who pestered her out of the governor’s seat in Alaska were too pin headed to anticipate this development.
ROFL... I think it was “The Jerk.”
Joan in pursuit of her Lord endured quite a scorching on her way to glory. You can bet the invective against Sarah will analogously get hot, hot, hot.
..The government will audit your books if you self-insure. The newly created Commissioner will submit a report to the government that includes "any recommendation the Commissioner deems appropriate to ensure that the law DOES NOT PROVIDE incentives for small and mid-size employers to self-insure." (21.23-23.3)
This is just one of 17 provisions that WORLD has summarized and posted to its website, www.worldmag.com, found under Washington's Prescription, The Editors, Healthcare.
Excellent material for information and hand-out. This is an absolute outrage.
Others: The government will define your "health benefits" ... will ration your care ... will establish and administer a public health insurance program ... will define how doctors manage their time ... will tax employers for not providing healthcare ... will tax individuals unless you are a foreign resident ... will order you to get end-of-life counseling and show proof ... will limit your hospital readmissions by penalizing hospitals ... will restrict coverage of special needs patients ... will not let you sue over coverage limits and costs decisions ... will mandate what physicians make ... will have access to your bank accounts ... will not call the fees it imposes taxes ... will issue you a health ID card ... will enlist or create outreach programs like ACORN to sign-up individuals in government-run plan; will create a new bureaucracy to include phone healthcare. References with page numbers and line items are given each provision.
God Bless Sarah!
Look for the SEIU to kick over Piper’s lemonade stand.
“the current bill may be benign, every government program, without exception, rapidly grows out of control.”
Exactly. It’s the frog boiling technique (incrementalism) so popular with the left.
Does anyone remember when ‘no smoking sections’ were added to flights? Then no smoking on flights within X miles, then no smoking on any flights, or restaurants or office building ...till they got what they wanted in the first place. Unlike conservatives who want their agenda implemented NOW, setting up its failure, libs are patient and willing to take one piece of pie at a time.
Be assured, the ultimate goal here is to eliminate the high cost of keeping the ‘non-productive,’ i.e., the elderly and disabled, to a minimum, which means expediting their demise.
Obviously, a generation that was raised to believe that “choice” is ok, and partial birth abortion is ok, does not have respect for life unless it fits within preconceived parameters of productivity.
Has anyone asked if the same advice and choices will be foisted on HIV/AIDS patients? Or drug addicts? Or high school dropout gang members? How about single mothers of several children by different fathers? None of them are particularly productive, either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.