The point of the article is that Palin is wrong but there could eventually be death panels anyway. The author is misinformed on this topic.
The article notes:
“And yes, it does call for explanations of orders regarding life sustaining treatments, and why such orders might be beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family, but there is no language in the bill mandating the individual’s death.”
That is all true and is what the bill says. Palin’s point has been that it is clear this counseling, combined with specific decisions to withhold life-sustaining health care to the elderly, constitutes death panels, which is what she meant.
The author agrees with Palin.