When you have the 500 billion Barry says he wants out of Medicare, you will have more rationing there also.
The bare facts are this- he could have bought everyone healthcare for less than he is wanting to spend here- and he doesn’t have the real money to pay for it.
It is not about health, it’s really about control- you can see it in this bill, and the Cap and Taxbill- everything he is proposing is unconstitutional, and designed to get government’s big foot in the door that is your lives.
It’s ALL about control.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Gaffa, I’d say that blake had it nailed correctly in comment #11, and it bears repeating.

blake: I probably should point out that while the provision might be out of the bill, the bill itself is the death panel, or as described above, the “withering on the vine panel”- while end of life counseling might be out, end of life is still in.

The point is, all policy and regulations governing what is covered, and to whom, as well as conditions for denial, are not laid out specifically in the bill. That is left to other powers… not the least of which is the Independent Medicare Advisory Council Act – the creation of a “death panel” of health czars who seize Congressional power and are tasked with changing Medicare coverage and reimbursement amounts bi-annually in order to rein in costs. This bill is far being dismantled.

And, in fact, any public option that has government bureaucrats that decide under what instances government health care will be provided, or denied, and whatever “counseling” or other mandate hoops they must jump with physicians to get the care is, in essence, a form of death panel.

Lest ye think that all “rationing” by private insurance is equivalent, you have to understand that supplemental policies will not cover treatment that is covered… in some way… by the primary policy care. Therefore if the public option will offer morphine as a “treatment”, or assisted suicide (as legal in Oregon) as “treatment”, private insurers may just exercise the option to not cover any other alternative. Even if superior. This already goes on daily in the Medicare world.

blake said it as good as it can be said. There is no “public option” that is acceptable. They are, every one, a financial spiral into bankruptcy and piss poor medical care. If Medicare cannot be funded today for under 20% of the population, using funds taken from every working American, there is no logic in adding over 50% of the US population to a public option, funded by taxpayers. Witness the incoming comments of Dr. Anne Doig, new president of the Canadian Medical Association, opining that the Canadian health system is imploding.

We know there must be change,” Doig said in a recent interview. “We’re all running flat out, we’re all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands.”

Canada’s universal health care system is not giving patients optimal care, Doig added. When her colleagues from across the country gather at the CMA conference in Saskatoon Sunday, they will discuss changes that need to be made, she said.

“We all agree the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize,” she said.

~~~

Ouellet has said that “competition should be welcomed, not feared,” meaning private health insurance should have a role in the public health system.

Doig said she isn’t sure what kind of changes will be proposed when the conference wraps up, but she does know that changes have to come – and fast. She said she understands that universal health care, while good in some ways, has not always been helpful for sick people or their families.

“(Canadians) have to understand that the system that we have right now — if it keeps on going without change — is not sustainable,” Doig said.

No… the current bill is not a single step to single payer, as Canada has. It is, however the ultimate quest.

However, I will say this… a large coup has been waged successfully. The American public has found a “description” that wakes them up. A “death panel” by any other name (IMAC, Comparate Effective Research, or whatever) is still a government “death panel”.

The choices for Americans is this… take the “cheap” government base, and risk denial in supplementals, or buy a gold plated package from your private insurer (the cost of which is driven up by under reimbursement of public options, inordinate bureaucratic red tape, trial lawyer friendly malpractice laws, and group access limited by nanny mandates).

However, in the US of A, the over 65 are denied this option. With a “new age Medicare” public option, it’s unlikely to be any different.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’m not sure it does much good taking death panels out of the current bill when it was funded in the stimulus bill.

Zeke Emmanuel is said to be included (naturally) on the proposed death panel.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

It seems as thought Erik Erickson of RedState is right in his assessment that a coup of a political party is necessary.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@GaffaUK: You ought to try and keep up with the story before you comment.

The provision in the bill which would set up these “death panels” was stricken from the Senate bill. It’s still in the House version.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Curt

By what objective measure you claim Palin won the debate? Are these ‘death panels’ being dismantled as we speak?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I don’t comment much on here, but have read for a long time. I will say the comments on here are far more intelligent than on the others I read.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Madalyn…

Don’t worry about that “relatively old” thing… one of the nice things about the internet and blogs is that there is no age, there is no skin color, there is no sex…it’s all just people’s ideas presented as words on a screen. You are what you put forth.

Besides…all the _best_ blogs have a strong representation of seniors. That’s part of what makes them among the best!! Well aged improves the quality!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

An article worth your time to read:

This one might make your blood boil…

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/08/health-care-trading-cards-collect-em.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0

When I first read Sarah’s statement, reading the words, “death panel”, I thought it was a bit strong. But, that lasted about 2 seconds. When you dig into the meat of why she chose those words, it’s entirely spot on. She just prefers to cut to the chaste, and gained the ear of the Obama Admin. by doing so.

Years ago, I worked as a temp at an HMO. Not being particularly political at that time, I still observed the strangeness of seeing a doctor on staff there, going through patient files with the help of a nurse, and deciding which they would cover and those they’d decline to cover. I remember thinking that he was in a way, playing the role of God, and it definitely unnerved me. I don’t know that these were end of life cases, but I think it does exemplify the current debate.

@Madalyn:
Thanks for your kind words, Madalyn, and welcome aboard!

Like or Dislike: 0  0