This guy is starting out with the life and death stuff ~ and so are you.
It's not at all the position to take if you want the rest of us to trust you.
Questions is: do voters want to pay the taxes to proved very expensive end-of-life treatments which provide brief (a weeks to months) life extension?
A reasonable point, but how do we decide which is which?
For example, I am personally aware of cases where $40,000 defibrillators have been implanted in patients with end-stage cancer and who died less than four months after the implant.
Bearing in mind that it's your and my tax money, are you willing to call that a "life and death issue" and give Medicare carte blanche to pay for it?