Sarah Palin Information Blog

Sarah Palin Web Brigade

  • Upcoming Palin Events

  • Sarah Palin’s Endorsees

  • Sarah Palin Channel

  • Amazing America

  • The Undefeated

  • ‘Stars Earn Stripes’

  • ‘Game Change’ Lies Exposed

  • Good Tidings and Great Joy: Protecting the Heart of Christmas

  • Our Sarah: Made in Alaska

  • America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag

  • Going Rogue: An American Life

  • Other Sarah Palin Info Sources

  • Login/RSS

  • Governor Palin on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinUSA

  • Governor Palin on Facebook

  • SarahPAC Notes

  • RSS SarahPAC Notes

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • SPWB on Facebook

  • SPWB on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinLinks

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • Join the SPWB Twibe!

  • Posts by Date

    June 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Jan    
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    30  
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • __________________________________________
  • Top Posts & Pages

  • __________________________________________
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • __________________________________________

Posts Tagged ‘health care’

Standing with Sarah on Health Care

Posted by Adrienne Ross on August 27, 2009

By Adrienne Ross from http://www.motivationtruth.com

I received an encouraging email from someone who has been following my writing on a few different websites. She shared with me the link to the video below and said simply, “You are in it.” That was all it took, of course, to pique my curiosity!

That was just an added benefit. The video, made by a website called Standing with Sarah, highlights Sarah Palin’s stand on the health care reform issue. It combines some of her statements with pictures that speak to her own commitment to the health and well-being of Americans. Included in the video are pictures of Sarah at the Walk for Autism, which she participated in on June 7th in Long Island. I attended that function, as well, as did some of her family members, including her nephew, Karcher, who has autism. You can read about this event and enjoy the pictures I took here.

See, Sarah Palin clearly cares about how we handle health care for our citizens. As a mom with a special needs child, Trig, who has Down Syndrome, and as Karcher’s aunt, she knows the importance of this issue. She is personally invested and has rallied the people of America and begged us to do all we can to keep the health of those we love out of the control of a government that does not–and cannot–love our family members the way we do. The wonderful thing you’ll see in the video is the concern she has, not only for her own family and children, but a sincere concern for all Americans.

Now that’s someone I can listen to about health care.

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin To Barack Obama: No Health Care Reform Without Legal Reform.

Posted by Gary P Jackson on August 21, 2009

Sarah Palin has just hit on the one issue Obama and his death cult do not want to discuss, and that is tort reform. Out of control lawsuits, sky high malpractice insurance, and doctors running more tests than needed, just to cover their tails, is all part of the single largest expense in American health care that can easily be remedied.

Tort reform is key. To “fix” healthcare, without major tort reform, would be like going in to do open heart surgery on someone, but not actually working on the heart!

We all know the stories of the trial lawyers who have gotten rich with bogus lawsuits. One of the most egregious practitioners of these phony baloney lawsuits is newly minted baby daddy John Edwards. Edwards became a multi-millionaire ambulance chaser by specializing in suing on behalf of children with cerebral palsy.

Edwards, a shyster deluxe, even went so far to “channel” unborn babies during his courtroom antics. Thanks to this one unscrupulous attorney, malpractice insurance went through the roof, many doctors quit their specialties, or went bankrupt.

But even worse, cases of cesarean birth dramatically increased, as Edwards used his greed, and junk science to convince people that natural childbirth was the culprit and cause of all of these cases of cerebral palsy.

Now besides the extra costs involved, having a cesarean birth is dangerous for the mother, as infections can easily set in, and of course, recovery is longer. But who cares, John Edwards sure has a nice house, doesn’t he!

This is just one guy who cost hospitals, doctors, and insurance companies hundreds of millions of dollars during his career. There are lawyers like him all over the country just waiting for their next payday.

Turn on the television. If you watch for any length of time, you will see dozens of ads from big law firms actively seeking defendants for all sorts of cases. Not saying all of them are bogus, but when you see people resorting to advertising nationally for victims, you have to wonder just how big the problem truly is or isn’t, and conclude it’s all about the Benjamins!

Of course, another issue people overlook in this, is the fact that lawyers are so busy chasing high profile, big paydays, that many cases that are real get shoved aside because they won’t make the attorney a huge payday. Small cases don’t add a new wing to the family compound!

As a Texan, I can say that tort reform works. Texas passed major tort reform years ago, capping damages one could get for “pain and suffering.” They also beefed the medical boards to investigate doctors suspected of having issues.

The result? As Sarah points out, thousands of doctors have moved to Texas. This has had a huge impact, especially in rural areas. Where there were once shortages of doctors, now there is coverage.

I live in a hospital town, we are home to a hospital that started out in a log cabin, which is still on the grounds, that has grown into a regional system of hospitals and clinics, and even has it’s own health care insurance plan.

Seeing a doctor here is an easy, very friendly process. Even though the complex is huge, the effort is to make sure every patient has their own regular doctor who is able to meet their needs. Very user friendly.

It is also a teaching hospital and is part of the Texas A&M system.

This is what happens when government is responsible, then gets out of the way.

I agree with Sarah Palin 100% on tort reform. For Barack Obama and the rest of his communist party to talk about “health care reform” without tort reform is beyond ridiculous, and it borders on criminal.

Of course, we all know that actually “reforming” health care is the last thing on these people’s minds. This is all a big power grab, and an attempt to completely usurp the Constitution of the United States. Anyone who has actually read HR 3200 knows that monstrosity is nothing more than a gateway to a complete communist state. It is a liberty and freedom stealing document that needs to be burned!

Lets get serious and get behind Sarah Palin. No tort reform, no health care bill.

Here is Sarah’s statement from Facebook:

No Health Care Reform Without Legal Reform:

President Obama’s health care “reform” plan has met with significant criticism across the country. Many Americans want change and reform in our current health care system. We recognize that while we have the greatest medical care in the world, there are major problems that we must face, especially in terms of reining in costs and allowing care to be affordable for all. However, as we have seen, current plans being pushed by the Democratic leadership represent change that may not be what we had in mind — change which poses serious ethical concerns over the government having control over our families’ health care decisions. In addition, the current plans greatly increase costs of health care, while doing lip service toward controlling costs.

We need to address a REAL bipartisan reform proposition that will have REAL impacts on costs, and quality of patient care.

As Governor of Alaska, I learned a little bit about being a target for frivolous suits and complaints (Please, do I really need to footnote that?). I went my whole life without needing a lawyer on speed-dial, but all that changes when you become a target for opportunists and people with no scruples. Our nation’s health care providers have been the targets of similar opportunists for years, and they too have found themselves subjected to false, frivolous, and baseless claims. To quote a former president, “I feel your pain.”

So what can we do? First, we cannot have health care reform without tort reform. The two are intertwined. For example, one supposed justification for socialized medicine is the high cost of health care. As Dr. Scott Gottlieb recently noted, “If Mr. Obama is serious about lowering costs, he’ll need to reform the economic structures in medicine—especially programs like Medicare.” [1] Two examples of these “economic structures” are high malpractice insurance premiums foisted on physicians (and ultimately passed on to consumers as “high health care costs”) and the billions wasted on defensive medicine.

Dr. Stuart Weinstein, with the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, recently explained the problem:

“The medical liability crisis has had many unintended consequences, most notably a decrease in access to care in a growing number of states and an increase in healthcare costs.

Access is affected as physicians move their practices to states with lower liability rates and change their practice patterns to reduce or eliminate high-risk services. When one considers that half of all neurosurgeons—as well as one third of all orthopedic surgeons, one third of all emergency physicians, and one third of all trauma surgeons—are sued each year, is it any wonder that 70 percent of emergency departments are at risk because they lack available on-call specialist coverage?” [2]

Dr. Weinstein makes good points, points completely ignored by President Obama. Dr. Weinstein details the costs that our out-of-control tort system are causing the health care industry and notes research that “found that liability reforms could reduce defensive medicine practices, leading to a 5 percent to 9 percent reduction in medical expenditures without any effect on mortality or medical complications.” Dr. Weinstein writes:

“If the Kessler and McClellan estimates were applied to total U.S. healthcare spending in 2005, the defensive medicine costs would total between $100 billion and $178 billion per year. Add to this the cost of defending malpractice cases, paying compensation, and covering additional administrative costs (a total of $29.4 billion). Thus, the average American family pays an additional $1,700 to $2,000 per year in healthcare costs simply to cover the costs of defensive medicine.

Excessive litigation and waste in the nation’s current tort system imposes an estimated yearly tort tax of $9,827 for a family of four and increases healthcare spending in the United States by $124 billion. How does this translate to individuals? The average obstetrician-gynecologist (OB-GYN) delivers 100 babies per year. If that OB-GYN must pay a medical liability premium of $200,000 each year (which is the rate in Florida), $2,000 of the delivery cost for each baby goes to pay the cost of the medical liability premium.” [3]

You would think that any effort to reform our health care system would include tort reform, especially if the stated purpose for Obama’s plan to nationalize our health care industry is the current high costs.

So I have new questions for the president: Why no legal reform? Why continue to encourage defensive medicine that wastes billions of dollars and does nothing for the patients? Do you want healthcare reform to benefit trial attorneys or patients?

Many states, including my own state of Alaska, have enacted caps on lawsuit awards against health care providers. Texas enacted caps and found that one county’s medical malpractice claims dropped 41 percent, and another study found a “55 percent decline” after reform measures were passed. [4] That’s one step in health care reform. Limiting lawyer contingency fees, as is done under the Federal Tort Claims Act, is another step.

The State of Alaska pioneered the “loser pays” rule in the United States, which deters frivolous civil law suits by making the loser partially pay the winner’s legal bills. Preventing quack doctors from giving “expert” testimony in court against real doctors is another reform.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry noted that, after his state enacted tort reform measures, the number of doctors applying to practice medicine in Texas “skyrocketed by 57 percent” and that the tort reforms “brought critical specialties to underserved areas.” These are real reforms that actually improve access to health care. [5]

Dr. Weinstein’s research shows that around $200 billion per year could be saved with legal reform. That’s real savings. That’s money that could be used to build roads, schools, or hospitals.

If you want to save health care, let’s listen to our doctors too. There should be no health care reform without legal reform. There can be no true health care reform without legal reform.

– Sarah Palin

[1] See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409904574350370729883030.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[2] See http://www.aaos.org/news/aaosnow/nov08/managing7.asp

[3] Id.

[4] See http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/new_laws_and_med_mal_damage_caps_devastate_plaintiff_and_defense_firms_alik/print/

[5] See http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/Tort-reform-must-be-part-of-health-care-reform-8096175.html

Posted in 2012, Alaska, Barracuda, big government, bureaucratic, Democratic Party, ECONOMY, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, Obama, Obamacare, Sarah Palin, Woman | Tagged: , , , , , | 13 Comments »

August 19, 2009 Synopsis of Governor Palin’s Accomplishments

Posted by Ron Devito on August 19, 2009

Governor Palin caused the removal of two particularly onerous aspects of HR 3200, Obama’s proposed health care bill via two words — “death panel” — in a FaceBook posting. Her posts, which were fully cited and referenced ignited a firestorm of public protest against the bill, which is ongoing. The removed provision includes “end-of-life” counseling, and quite likely the “public option” will be removed.

When she left office, Governor Palin said, “I will be able to fight even harder for you – for what is right and for the truth. And I have never felt that you need a title to do that.” True to those words, Governor Palin accomplished this feat as a private citizen, having been out of office nary two weeks. Using FaceBook, she bypassed the mainstream media and got her message out unfiltered, awaking an otherwise apathetic public.

When she left office, Governor Palin had around 550,000 supporters on FaceBook. As of this writing, the number of supporters stands at 799,287 — just shy of 800,000. Her former gubernatorial Twitter Page is still gaining followers and as of this writing has 138,045. No date has been set for when this page will transition to a new name and Tweeting will resume.

Governor Palin received five awards at the National Rifle Association’s XVIII Gun Collectors Seminar in Anchorage for defending our Second Amendment rights. The most significant of these awards is a Benefactor Membership in the NRA, which is a $5,000 addition to the Life Membership, which as of this writing is $1,000 (The NRA has an Easy Pay option, where the membership is paid off in quarterly installments over 10 years). The second award — a Gold Medal of Merit for the Promotion of Gun Collecting had not been awarded to anyone in 10 years. The remaining three awards were life memberships at gun collector groups in Missouri, Ohio, and Texas.

Various media reports stated that Governor Palin briefly visited New York City to meet with Harper Collins regarding her book deal. While the trip itself is not an accomplishment, the book deal most definitely is. Governor Palin’s autobiography is expected to be released in the spring of 2010.


Complete stories at:

http://sarahs-accomplishments.blogspot.com/

En Español:

http://translate.google.com/translate?client=tmpg&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsarahs-accomplishments.blogspot.com%2F&langpair=enes

한국어 (Korean)

http://translate.google.com/translate?client=tmpg&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsarahs-accomplishments.blogspot.com%2F&langpair=enko

עִברִית (Hebrew)

http://translate.google.com/translate?client=tmpg&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsarahs-accomplishments.blogspot.com%2F&langpair=eniw

日本語 (Japanese)

http://translate.google.com/translate?client=tmpg&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsarahs-accomplishments.blogspot.com%2F&langpair=enja

繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)

http://translate.google.com/translate?client=tmpg&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsarahs-accomplishments.blogspot.com%2F&langpair=enzh-TW

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Analysis of Palin Wins — by James Taranto

Posted by Ron Devito on August 14, 2009

This referenced article by James Taranto article speaks extensively about Governor Palin’s two victories in the health care debate this week.

The first victory was to establish and prove the thesis that Obama’s socialized health care plan will lead to rationing. Rationing will cut care to those who are deemed of least economic benefit to society.

That victory was followed by a legislative one…the Senate Finance Committee removed the “end-of-life” provision from the health care bill.

Taranto delineates both victories in detail and shoots down the canard that Sarah Palin somehow has a limited intellect. Quite the contrary, Taranto establishes what we at Accomplishments have known for a long time — that Sarah Palin is very highly intelligent and astute.

Click the URL in the reference to read the article. It will spawn a new window or tab depending on your browser configuration.

References

Taranto, J. (2009, August 14). “Palin Wins: If she’s dim and Obama is brilliant, how did he lose the argument to her?” Wall Street Journal. Retrieved August 14, 2009 from: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409904574350400852801602.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin: Troubling Questions Remain on “ObamaCare”

Posted by Ron Devito on August 14, 2009

Following is Governor Palin’s statement of August 14, 2009, as posted on her FaceBook account. It addresses the removal of “end of life consultations provisions” from the bill.

I join millions of Americans in expressing appreciation for the Senate Finance Committee’s decision to remove the provision in the pending health care bill that authorizes end-of-life consultations (Section 1233 of HR 3200). It’s gratifying that the voice of the people is getting through to Congress; however, that provision was not the only disturbing detail in this legislation; it was just one of the more obvious ones (Palin, 2009, ¶1).

As I noted in my statement last week, nationalized health care inevitably leads to rationing. There is simply no way to cover everyone and hold down the costs at the same time. The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama’s key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I’m speaking of the “Complete Lives System” advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president’s chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,” a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential. [1] Why the silence from the president on this aspect of his nationalization of health care? Does he agree with the “Complete Lives System”? If not, then why is Dr. Emanuel his policy [adviser]? What is he advising the president on? I just learned that Dr. Emanuel is now distancing himself from his own work and claiming that his “thinking has evolved” on the question of rationing care to benefit the strong and deny the weak. [2] How convenient that he disavowed his own work only after the nature of his scholarship was revealed to the public at large (Palin, 2009, ¶2).

The president is busy assuring us that we can keep our private insurance plans, but common sense (and basic economics) tells us otherwise. The public option in the Democratic health care plan will crowd out private insurers, and that’s what it’s intended to do. A single payer health care plan has been President Obama’s agenda all along, though he is now claiming otherwise. Don’t take my word for it. Here’s what he said back in 2003: (Palin, 2009, ¶3)

“I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan…. A single payer health care plan – universal health care plan – that’s what I would like to see.” [3] (Palin, 2009, ¶4)

A single-payer health care plan might be what Obama would like to see, but is it what the rest of us would like to see? What does a single payer health care plan look like? We need look no further than other countries who have adopted such a plan. The picture isn’t pretty. [4] The only way they can control costs is to ration care. As I noted in my earlier statement quoting Thomas Sowell, government run health care won’t reduce the price of medical care; it will simply refuse to pay the price. The expensive innovative procedures that people from all over the world come to the United States for will not be available under a government plan that seeks to cover everyone by capping costs (Palin, 2009, ¶5).

Our senior citizens are right to be wary of this health care bill. Medical care at the end of life accounts for 80 percent of all health care. When care is rationed, that is naturally where the cuts will be felt first. The “end-of-life” consultations authorized in Section 1233 of HR 3200 were an obvious and heavy handed attempt at pressuring people to reduce the financial burden on the system by minimizing their own care. Worst still, it actually provided a financial incentive to doctors to initiate these consultations. People are right to point out that such a provision doesn’t sound “purely voluntary” (Palin, 2009, ¶6)

In an article I noted yesterday, Charles Lane wrote: (Palin, 2009, ¶7)

“Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life’s end would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and fact. Yes, it’s good to have a doctor’s perspective. But Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party — the government — recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations. You don’t have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach.” [5] (Palin, 2009, ¶8)

I agree. Last year, I issued a proclamation for “Healthcare Decisions Day.” [6] The proclamation sought to increase the public’s knowledge about creating living wills and establishing powers of attorney. There was no incentive to choose one option over another. There was certainly no financial incentive for physicians to push anything. In fact, the proclamation explicitly called on medical professionals and lawyers “to volunteer their time and efforts” to provide information to the public (Palin, 2009, ¶9).

Comparing the “Healthcare Decisions Day” proclamation to Section 1233 of HR 3200 is ridiculous. The two are like apples and oranges. The attempt to link the two shows how desperate the proponents of nationalized health care are to shift the debate away from the disturbing details of their bill (Palin, 2009, ¶10).

There is one aspect of this bill which I have not addressed yet, but it’s a very obvious one. It’s the simple fact that we can’t afford it. But don’t take my word for it. Take the word of Doug Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. He told the Senate Budget Committee last month: (Palin, 2009, ¶11)

“In the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.” [7] (Palin, 2009, ¶12)

Dr. Elmendorf went on to note that this health care legislation would increase spending at an unsustainable rate (Palin, 2009, ¶13).

Our nation is already $11.5 trillion in debt. Where will the money come from? Taxes, of course. And will a burdensome new tax help our economy recover? Of course not. The best way to encourage more health care coverage is to foster a strong economy where people can afford to purchase their own coverage if they choose to do so. The current administration’s economic policies have done nothing to help in this regard (Palin, 2009, ¶14).

Health care is without a doubt a complex and contentious issue, but health care reform should be a market oriented solution. There are many ways we can reform the system and lower costs without nationalizing it (Palin, 2009, ¶15).

The economist Arthur Laffer has taken the lead in pushing for a patient-center health care reform policy. He noted in a Wall Street Journal article earlier this month: (Palin, 2009, ¶16)

“A patient-centered health-care reform begins with individual ownership of insurance policies and leverages Health Savings Accounts, a low-premium, high-deductible alternative to traditional insurance that includes a tax-advantaged savings account. It allows people to purchase insurance policies across state lines and reduces the number of mandated benefits insurers are required to cover. It reallocates the majority of Medicaid spending into a simple voucher for low-income individuals to purchase their own insurance. And it reduces the cost of medical procedures by reforming tort liability laws.” [8] (Palin, 2009, ¶17)

Those are real reforms that we can live with and afford. Once again, I warn my fellow Americans that if we go down the path of nationalized health care, there will be no turning back. We must stop and think or we may find ourselves losing even more of our freedoms (Palin, 2009, ¶18).

– Sarah Palin

[1] See http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions
[2] See http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/14/white-house-adviser-backs-off-rationing/
[3]See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hsqzSKuC44
[4] See http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2M0ODk0OTNkZjkwNGM4OGMyYTEwYWY3ODUzMzFiOTc=
[5] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html
[6] See http://www.gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1094&type=6
[7] See http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/cbo-sees-no-federal-cost-savings-in-dem-health-plans.html
[8] See http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574324361508092006.html

Commentary

Governor Palin addresses these core issues with her statement: nationalized health care will lead to rationing. Rationing will cut care to those who are deemed of least economic benefit to society. A government run health care system is not free. It must be paid for and the necessary result is higher spending and higher taxes — the exact opposite of what we need for economic growth. Governor Palin delineated one of several market-oriented solutions to reforming our health care system. Further, though end-of-life consultations has been removed from the bill, the core ideology of “Complete Lives” is and remains the underpinning of Obama’s health care plan.

The difference between Governor Palin and Obama could not be more stark. Reagan Conservatism, and a culture that respects life and human dignity underpins her thought process. Obama advocates socialism, communism and a culture that only values life and human dignity to the extent that it provides a stated level of benefit to society. Obama and his administration are advancing a culture of death.

As with her prior statements, Governor Palin has backed up her statements with references and evidence proving her thesis. Her strategy of posting these statements on her FaceBook page and bypassing the mainstream media is nothing short of brilliant — considering that they usually get even the most basic facts wrong.

References

Palin, S.L.H. (2009, August 14). “Troubling questions remain about Obama’s health care plan.” FaceBook, Sarah Palin. Retrieved August 14, 2009 from: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=116979483434

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Palin Wins! Death Panels/End of Life Provision to Go

Posted by Ron Devito on August 13, 2009

by Pamela Geller

Finance Committee to drop end-of-life provision heh. Palin power.

The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top Republican member said Thursday.The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by conservatives as “death panels” to encourage euthanasia.

They are dropping the death panel. But frankly they will drop it back in once the health care rout is passed. It’s not enough NO OBAMACARE.

Obama’s Ration Man: Rahm’s brother Ezekial Emanuel (read the whole thing at Political Evidence)

President Obama’s chief adviser on healthcare is Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. In addition to Dr. Emanuel being a trained oncologist, an NIH Bioethicist and a fellow at the nonprofit bioethics research institute, The Hastings Center, he’s also an avowed communitarian who advocates healthcare rationing.In February 2009, he was tapped by the administration to work on the formulation of a national healthcare strategy. Officially, Dr. Emanuel is a special advisor to the director of the White House
Office of Management and Budget for health policy. In February Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported that he is “working on (the) health care reform effort.” He is “detailed” to the OMB spot and is still officially an employee of the NIH.

In Dr. Emanuel’s writings, he overtly advocates the rationing of healthcare based on age. In January 2009, just one month prior to taking his new position at the White House, Dr. Emanuel co-wrote an article entitled, “Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions”, in the British medical journal The Lancet. In this article he advocates a particular healthcare allocation system which he calls the “complete lives system.” He declared in The Lancet article that in healthcare, “scarcity is the mother of allocation.” He explains, “This system (complete lives system) incorporates five principles: youngest-first, prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value. As such, it prioritizes younger people who have not yet lived a complete life and will be unlikely to do so without aid.”

In other words, Dr. Emanuel places a higher value on a young adult’s life, than he would the life of a senior. He goes further. He flatly declares that “Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritizing adolescents and young adults over infants.” From his standpoint, society has already made an economic investment in the lives of young adults whereas no significant investment has yet been made in the lives of infants, so therefore it’s only “fair” that resources be allocated toward the young adults and away from the infants. He also applies this standard to those that he deems of “no societal worth” such as people with Down syndrome. Sadly, this mindset is eerily similar to that of German National Socialists (Nazis) for the Nazis rationalized their evil attacks against the disabled and vulnerable of their society by throwing out the false notion of “Das Leben nicht lebenswert” or “the life not worth living.” This was coupled with claims that the disabled were a financial burden on society. The propaganda poster below illustrates the point well.

Government Controlled Healthcare, a Hand that Rocks, Cradles to Graves “Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism.”- Vladimir Lenin

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin: “Concerning the Death Panels”

Posted by Ron Devito on August 13, 2009

Following is Governor Palin’s expanded statement on FaceBook, concerning “death panels,” and why she uses that terminology:

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 (Palin, 2009, ¶1).

The President made light of these concerns. He said: (Palin, 2009, ¶2)

“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” (Palin, 2009, ¶3)[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 (Palin, 2009, ¶4).

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](Palin, 2009, ¶5)

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] (Palin, 2009, ¶6)

As Lane also points out: (Palin, 2009, ¶7)

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 (Palin, 2009, ¶8).

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] (Palin, 2009, ¶9)

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] (Palin, 2009, ¶10)

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: (Palin, 2009, ¶11)

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] (Palin, 2009, ¶12)

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] (Palin, 2009, ¶13)

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 (Palin, 2009, ¶14).

[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.

Commentary

The observation to be made here is that Governor Palin once again, cites, references and backs up her statements with facts and evidence. She didn’t just pull her thoughts out of thin air….or off a teleprompter.

Unlike Obama, she read the different variants of this bill. She knows what is in it.

Her use of the term “death panels” and thesis that this plan is evil is well-researched and based on documented evidence presented by numerous sources on both sides of the issue.

Those who continue to doubt the veracity of her statements on health care simply have not done any research on the subject matter.

References

Palin, S.L.H. (2009, August 12). “Concerning the Death Panels.” FaceBook, Sarah Palin. Retrieved August 13, 2009 from: http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=24718773587&__a=1

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin Reduced Medicaid Backlog 83% In Two Years. Saved Senior Citizens From The Horrors Of Government Run Health Care

Posted by Gary P Jackson on August 12, 2009

Fresh off of taking the health care debate to a whole new level, and exposing the immorality of it all, Sarah Palin has released some very interesting statistics that prove her bonafides on health care issues.

Released through her Facebook page, Palin lays out how she fought the Alaska Legislature to make sure senior citizens didn’t have to wait for quality health care.

Now obviously this shows that Sarah is someone who gets things done. Someone who actually serves the people. But more importantly, this proves what Sarah and all of those who oppose Obama’s attempt to forcibly destroy the best health care in the world have been saying.

What could be a better predictor of how things would end up with the government running health care?

Yes, there will be health care rationing, that’s what was going on in Alaska until Sarah stepped in. Unfortunately, under Obamacare, there will be no one to intervene on behalf of America’s senior citizens.

You know, this sort of thing is exactly what Sarah was talking about when she used the words “death panels.”

Now of course, the media, the democrat/communists and our RINO friends all blew a gasket over that comment and ran around trying to deal with it. Even Obama was compelled to clumsily try and refute it in his Portsmouth, NH faux townhall event.

These Ivy League brainiacs couldn’t understand what all of us uneducated rubes know instinctively. Now will there LITERALLY be “death panels,” a group of people that an individual will have to stand before and be judged?

Of course not.

These government types aren’t brave enough to face people in person. But there will be a group of “medical advisors” who will make up a board that determines who is eligible, as a group, for certain health care procedures. This group will look at cold hard data, not warm human beings as they decide.

The other problem is money. America is already broke. We owe more money now than we can ever pay back. As this actually starts effecting the government’s ability to function, there will be rationing and long waits for service. It’s inevitable.

Every nation that has socialized medicine rations care. People die quite often waiting for doctors to treat major illnesses. There are plenty of stories of people in nations with socialized care who die of cancer that could have been successfully treated had they gotten early care and diagnosis.

All of these things, and more are what Sarah was talking about when she spoke of the metaphoric “death panels.” These panels are the ones who set up the standards and practices as well as the bean counters who have to stick to a budget.

But enough of that, let’s look at the release from Sarah Palin”s office:


“Contrary to some assertions, Sarah Palin has a strong record supporting Alaskan seniors. For example, Governor Palin successfully obtained approval for a five year extension of a state program that provided monthly cash payments to low-income seniors.

On May 23, 2007, using a rarely invoked emergency regulation, Governor Palin ordered assistance benefits to continue for Alaska’s neediest seniors after the Alaska legislature failed to fund the SeniorCare Program. After her action, the legislature responded, and on July 28, 2007, Governor Palin signed Senate Bill 4 to continue support for low-income Alaskan seniors by adopting the Senior Benefits Program. “This program continues important assistance to Alaska seniors,” Governor Palin said. “I promised that seniors would not go hungry, and we worked with the Alaska Legislature to address this critical need.” It was estimated that 10,700 Alaskan seniors would be able to benefit under the program.

Also under Governor Palin’s tenure, on December 19, 2008, the state stepped in and took over the Mary Conrad Center, an Anchorage nursing home, when the state determined that there was “‘immediate danger to the health, safety or welfare’ of its residents.”

So, with this clear record of support and care for Alaska’s seniors by Governor Palin, what is the current criticism about? According to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, prior to Governor Palin’s election in November 2006, in April of 2006, in an effort to control rapidly increasing costs for home health care providers, known as the PCA program, Governor Frank Murkowski’s administration implemented a screening process for Alaska Medicaid eligible persons by using a Level of Care assessment (LOC). The LOC assessment was designed for persons who would otherwise require hospitalization or nursing home care and was intended to help weed out fraud and abuse.

By definition, many of these people were ill, elderly or disabled and thus in need of personal care attendants to assist them. Only registered nurse assessors were allowed to evaluate consumers to determine if they qualified for PCA care. The job of assessing consumers was contracted out, but the State of Alaska DHHS determined that the hired contractor had too much backlog. Notably, under federal Medicaid strictures, the State could not get another private business to bid on the contract. So the State was forced to take over the job in November 2007. However, the State DHHS was unable to eliminate the backlog using its own staff, and the backlog then grew. The Federal DHHS temporarily suspended new admissions to the PCA program pending audit compliance to handle the backlog of existing cases and come up with a plan to speed the assessment process. The suspension has been lifted as of August 12.

Further, Gov. Palin’s FY 2009 budget clearly showed her analysis of the issue as of December 2007, and described both the problem and the solution long before the federal government got involved. The backlog issue was discussed and a plan proposed for improvement.

The graph below shows that under Gov. Palin (2007 and 2008) the backlog problem was dramatically reduced, from 30.9% in 2005 to 4.5% in 2008. Looking at these data, one can conclude that Gov. Palin substantially reduced the outstanding percentage of Medicaid assessments by 83%.


% Not Reviewed

FY 2008 4.5%

FY 2007 4.5%

FY 2006 23.18%

FY 2005 30.9%

What is the lesson in all of this? Even with good intentions, the government generally cannot provide better health care services than the private sector. Beware of complex federal laws purporting to offer government health care. For those who want nationalized medicine, take heed of this lesson.”

More information can be found here.


Time and time again Sarah Palin proves that she has the leadership qualities America is looking for. While the NYC/D.C. Beltway “educated elites” are stuck in a quagmire of mediocrity and confusion, Sarah has already been there, done that, and got the t-shirt from it!

Sarah’s experience with government run health care, and it’s dangerous and disastrous effects on human beings, should serve as a major warning to all. You do not want the government to have anything to do with how you basic needs to quality health care are met. Might as well commit suicide and get it over with.

It still amazes me how the Republican party is tackling this issue. Now granted, there are some sharp folks working behind the scenes crafting real reform, but they aren’t getting themselves heard. For the most part though the message from the Republicans to the democrat/communists is a hearty “slow down.”

Sarah Palin’s message to the democrat/communists is “Not no, but HELL no!”

Posted in 2012, Alaska, Alaska statehood, Barracuda, bureaucratic, Children with Special Needs, Democratic Party, Family, GOP, GOP / Conservative, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, influential people, Internet Activism, National, Native Americans, Obama, Obamacare, President, reform, Republican, RNC, Sarah Palin, special needs, special needs children, Washington, Woman | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Oh My….Barack Obama Caught Astroturfing!

Posted by Gary P Jackson on August 12, 2009

My oh my. Obama and the democrats have just been hoisted by their own petard!

This is really and truly delicious. If you saw Barack Obama’s totally staged townhall meeting in Portsmouth, NH, you saw something right out of central casting. I mean that was some serious stagecraft.

We’ve all seen the many highly contentious townhall meetings on TV, and you simply don’t see a quiet, gentle, supportive crowd. It just ain’t happening!

What you do see are some angry middle aged and senior citizens who are not taking this lying down! You see people who have never done anything political in their lives who have become activists!

So this precious moment during Obama’s campaign stop just didn’t pass the smell test. The second person “randomly selected” to ask the Dear Leader a question was young Julie Hall. She asks her question at 29m:25s into the video.

You can watch the video here.

Julia read the following question off a piece of paper: “As I was walking in I saw a lot of signs outside saying mean things about reforming healthcare. How do kids know what is true and why do people want a new system that can help more of us”.

Yeah, that was totally spontaneous.

Of course those “mean things” were on posters being held by angry Americans who weren’t allowed under the big tent to participate. No dissent allowed in Hopey Changey Land!

Of course, this “totally unrehearsed and random comment” gave Obama a perfect lead in to talk about Sarah Palin’s brilliant “death panel” comment that has all of the democrats scrambling, as well as talking about not killing grandma off. And of course, blame it all on the Republicans (who don’t have enough votes to stop anything.)

The fact that there will be, in fact, defacto “death panels” has been discussed everywhere, so we’ll let that be for now.

The important thing here to know is who sweet little Julie Hall is. You would think in this day and age if someone is going to go out and pretend to be just some civilian off the street, they’d either delete their Facebook account, or radically change it up. But we are dealing with liberals here, not exactly brain surgeons.

As you see from the photos here, and a screen shot of the video, Julie’s mother is democrat insider Kathleen Manning Hall seen posing and smiling with our fearless leader, Barack Obama!

Even more interesting is the fact that this randomly chosen young Julie, lives in Malden, MA, as does Kathleen.

Coincidence?

Kathleen Manning Hall’s campaign contributions list the occupation “Legal Asst, Looney and Grossman LLP” and a home address in Malden MA:

Looks like she donated $636 to Obama in 2008.

But wait, there’s more:

This lists donations to Obama of $230 on 6/15/07, $250 on 9/28/07, $500 on 9/30/07, $300 on 3/2/08

On that link we have the $636 previously mentioned from “Kathleen Manning Hall” but we also have $1355 donated to Obama by “Kathleen Hall, Legal Assistant, Looney & Grossman” at the same address.

Looney and Grossman loves Democrats – their employees donated $12,101 in total to Democrats and $0 to Republicans.

Back to Kathleen’s Facebook Page, here are some of her Facebook friends. A quick trip to Google will find out these friends are all big time Democratic insiders:

Martha Coakley, (Democrat) Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Adam Parkhomenko, former aide to Hillary Clinton, Democrat running for VA House of Delegates (who has the support of the Brady Campaign, President Clinton and Wes Clark)

Addisu Demissie, National Political Director of Organizing for America and former Ohio Get out The Vote director of Obama for America

Adrienne Elrod, Chief of Staff to Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA)

Alan Rosenblatt, Associate Director for Online Advocacy at the Center for American Progress (and Huffington Post blogger)

Alayna Van Tassel, Budget and Policy Director for MA Senator Pat Jehlen

So much for the “randomly picked” question.

This is as pathetic as it gets.

The democrat are crashing and burning on the health care issue. Scott Rasmussen’s latest poll has support for Obamacare at a new low and circling the drain.

Obama’s townhall was a rambling, incoherent mess. He told many whoppers, like the fact that AARP is supporting his plan. They have come out and said they are not, and did that long before Obama’s NH dog and pony show.

He also brought up the Post Office vs UPS and Fed Ex as a sales pitch for government run health care.

Seriously!

It was just a very bad day.

Photo of the audience at Portsmouth, NH townhall meeting:

What makes this delicious is all of the crowing the democrats, who invented political astroturfing, have been doing in regard to the real grass roots activism that millions of Americans are getting involved in.

Speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi first called all of this genuine anger astroturf back in April when all of the tea parties were in high gear as seen on the video here.

Madam Pelosi has continued her outright hatred towards the ordinary American people by pronouncing the townhall protesters astroturf too. A few days later Harry Reid and fellow slug Chuck Schumer chimed in a well. You have to wonder if they understand who their bosses are and who signs their paychecks!

And again, this from the group who invented political astroturfing!

Obama’s man, David Axelrod is the king of astroturf!

And Obama himself was a trainer of “thugs for hire” back in his ACORN days! And he had zero problem with calling out the union kneebreakers from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to beat up some unarmed American patriots who have attended townhalls to protest.

All of this disgraceful talk about honest Americans prompted AstroTurf Chairman Michael Dennis to come out and express his outrage that these sleazy democrats were using his product to attack the American people.

As if to double down on stupidity, a democrat party specialty, Nancy Pelosi dragged her number two man Steny Hoyer, along for a great little op-ed, where she called the patriotic men and women who oppose their insane communist plans “un-American!”

Amazingly, for 8 long years we heard these same loons lecture us that dissent was the truest form of patriotism. That speaking truth to power was cool. Now it’s a crime against the state!

For the most part, the American public has gotten decidedly tired of the democrats. The democrat party lies to the American people when the truth would work better.

It’s pathological!

They have to lie about everything they do because no one would ever elect them as dog catcher if they actually told the truth about what they were up to!

It’s time for all of America to join together. I mean ALL of America.

Barack Obama and the democrat party have declared war on all of us.

They have declared war on the American citizen.

They have flat decided that even though most of the nation wants them to stand down, stop spending our great grandkid’s future, and leave the best health care on earth alone, they are still going to go full steam ahead and build themselves a communist utopia anyhow!

I mean who really cares what the peasants think!

It’s really pretty pathetic though, when they have to bring out a sweet innocent girl like Julie Hall to shill for them!

I’d say that Barack Obama and the democrats should be ashamed of themselves, but that is a foreign concept to this pathetic bunch!

Posted in 2012, Barracuda, character assassination, Conservative, Democratic Party, establishment, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, nationalization, Obama, Obamacare, poll, President, reform, Republican, RNC, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, special needs, special needs children, Woman | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Governor Palin Provides References for Her Health Care Statement

Posted by Ron Devito on August 8, 2009

Governor Palin provided a comprehensive list of articles, editorials, and a video which formed the basis of her cogent and excellent statement on health care. Following is her complete entry from her FaceBook page:

As Americans spend the next few weeks discussing health care reform, I thought it might be helpful to share some articles (and one panel discussion video) that I’ve found especially insightful (Palin, 2009, ¶1).

Washington Post editorial, July 26, 2009
“The Health-Care Sacrifice: What President Obama needs to tell the public about the cost of reform”

But Mr. Obama’s soothing bedside manner masks the reality that getting health costs under control will require making difficult choices about what procedures and medications to cover. It will require saying no, or having the patient pay more, at times when the extra expense is not justified by the marginal improvement in care.

*********

Betsey McCaughey, Wall Street Journal, July 30, 2009
“GovernmentCare’s Assault on Seniors”

But legislation now being rushed through Congress—H.R. 3200 and the Senate Health Committee Bill—will reduce access to care, pressure the elderly to end their lives prematurely, and doom baby boomers to painful later years.

The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion to $1.6 trillion health bills with new taxes and a $500 billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as baby boomers turn 65 and increase Medicare enrollment by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that only 1% of Medicare cuts will come from eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.

[See also Dr. McCaughey’s rebuttal of PolitiFact’s Truth-O-Meter re: “End of Life Counseling” here.]

*********

Senator Sam Brownback, National Review, August 3, 2009
“Don’t Punish Seniors for Health-Care Reform: Denying care options to retirees is necessarily a part of the Democrats plan”

One particular provision in the Democratic bill has seniors worried, and rightly so. A new “Center for Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation” could ration access to medicines and treatments based on the government’s assessment of the value of a human life and the “cost-effectiveness” of treatment.

*********

Raymond Arroyo, EWTN, July 25, 2009
“What You Need To Know About the Health Care Reform Bills”

Here’s to your health, unless you are too old, too young, too disabled or any combination of the above. The health care reform bills wending their way through Congress should be focused on the well being of each citizen. Instead, it seems the bills, designed to contain costs while simultaneously extending health coverage to everyone, target certain vulnerable groups including the elderly, the pre-born, and the disabled. It all comes down to cost. How to pay for this colossus remains a question on the Hill. But the consensus seems to be: raise taxes and ration care. Both ideas have been woven into the current health care bills.

*********

Betsey McCaughey, New York Post, July 24, 2009
“Deadly Doctors”

[Obama health policy advisor Dr. Ezekiel] Emanuel, however, believes that “communitarianism” should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens… An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia” (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. ’96).

Translation: Don’t give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson’s or a child with cerebral palsy.

He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years” (Lancet, Jan. 31).

*********

Thomas Sowell, Real Clear Politics, August 4, 2009
“Utopia Versus Freedom”

If we can be so easily stampeded by rhetoric that neither the public nor the Congress can be bothered to read, much less analyze, bills making massive changes in medical care, then do not be surprised when life and death decisions about you or your family are taken out of your hands– and out of the hands of your doctor– and transferred to bureaucrats in Washington.

*********

David S. Broder, Washington Post, July 26, 2009
“Our New Medical Judges?”

If President Obama has his way, another such unelected authority will be created — a manager and monitor for the vast and expensive American health-care system. As part of his health-reform effort, he is seeking to launch the Independent Medicare Advisory Council, or IMAC, a bland title for a body that could become as much an arbiter of medicine as the Fed is of the economy or the Supreme Court of the law.

*********

The Heritage Foundation, July 30, 2009
“Obamacare: One Pill, Two Pill, Red Pill, Blue Pill; Top 10 Reasons Obamacare Is Wrong for America”

7. Who Makes Medical Decisions? What is the right medical treatment and should bureaucrats determine what Americans can or cannot have? While the House and Senate language is vague, amendments offered in House and Senate committees to block government rationing of care were routinely defeated. Cost or a federal health board could be the deciding factors. President Obama himself admitted this when he said, “Maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller,” when asked about an elderly woman who needed a pacemaker.

*********

National Review editorial, July 30, 2009
“Incurable”

The public option is certainly a weakness of the current House Democrats’ bill, one that could destroy the private-insurance market over time. But the rest of the bill takes the same federal-government-knows-best approach. It uses mandates on employers and individuals to force tens of millions of Americans to buy the level of insurance coverage the federal government demands. For those who cannot afford this level, it offers subsidies in the form of a new entitlement. And it increases the federal role in telling doctors and hospitals what constitutes appropriate medical practice.

The mandates — effectively, they are taxes — will reduce wages, limit new hires, and increase prices. The subsidies, enormously expensive from the outset, can be expected to grow with time to cover a larger and larger share of the population, just as Medicaid has done, and for the same political reasons. And having the government dictate medical practice worsens care and will inevitably lead to rationing.

*********

Thomas L. DiLorenzo, Mises Daily, July 28, 2009
“Socialized Healthcare vs. The Laws of Economics”

Price controls, or laws that force prices down below market-clearing levels (where supply and demand are coordinated), artificially stimulate the amount demanded by consumers while reducing supply by making it unprofitable to supply as much as previously. The result of increased demand and reduced supply is shortages. Non-price rationing becomes necessary. This means that government bureaucrats, not individuals and their doctors, inevitably determine who will get medical treatment and who will not, what kind of medical technology will be available, how many doctors there will be, and so forth.

All countries that have adopted socialized healthcare have suffered from the disease of price-control-induced shortages. If a Canadian, for instance, suffers third-degree burns in an automobile crash and is in need of reconstructive plastic surgery, the average waiting time for treatment is more than 19 weeks, or nearly five months. The waiting time for orthopaedic surgery is also almost five months; for neurosurgery it’s three full months; and it is even more than a month for heart surgery (see The Fraser Institute publication, Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada). Think about that one: if your doctor discovers that your arteries are clogged, you must wait in line for more than a month, with death by heart attack an imminent possibility. That’s why so many Canadians travel to the United States for healthcare.

*********

Thomas Sowell, Real Clear Politics, August 5, 2009
“Care Versus Control”

If this new medical scheme is so wonderful, why can’t it stand the light of day or a little time to think about it?

The obvious answer is that the administration doesn’t want us to know what it is all about or else we would not go along with it. Far better to say that we can’t wait, that things are just too urgent. This tactic worked with whizzing the “stimulus” package through Congress, even though the stimulus package itself has not worked.

Any serious discussion of government-run medical care would have to look at other countries where there is government-run medical care. As someone who has done some research on this for my book, “Applied Economics,” I can tell you that the actual consequences of government-controlled medical care are not a pretty picture, however inspiring the rhetoric that accompanies it.

*********

The Cato Institute Policy Forum
“What Government-Run Health Care Really Means”

*********

Michael D. Tanner, Cato Institute, August 2009
“Not Enough Health Care to Go Around”

The reality, however, is that every government-run healthcare system around the world rations care.

In Great Britain, the National Institute on Clinical Effectiveness makes such decisions, including a controversial determination that certain cancer drugs are “too expensive.” The government effectively puts a price tag on each citizen’s life…

Free-market healthcare reformers, on the other hand, want to shift more of the decisions (and therefore the financial responsibility) back to the individual.

*********

Arthur B. Laffer, Wall Street Journal, August 5, 2009
“How to Fix the Health-Care ‘Wedge’: There is an alternative to ObamaCare”

Rather than expanding the role of government in the health-care market, Congress should implement a patient-centered approach to health-care reform. A patient-centered approach focuses on the patient-doctor relationship and empowers the patient and the doctor to make effective and economical choices.

A patient-centered health-care reform begins with individual ownership of insurance policies and leverages Health Savings Accounts, a low-premium, high-deductible alternative to traditional insurance that includes a tax-advantaged savings account. It allows people to purchase insurance policies across state lines and reduces the number of mandated benefits insurers are required to cover. It reallocates the majority of Medicaid spending into a simple voucher for low-income individuals to purchase their own insurance. And it reduces the cost of medical procedures by reforming tort liability laws.

*********

Deroy Murdock, National Review, July 20, 2009
“Health-Care Reform: Why Not Try Ownership?”

Health-care reform should give Americans the option of using money tax-free to purchase whatever kinds of health insurance make them happy. If employers offer such plans, lovely. If not, individuals should be encouraged, through tax-free Health Savings Accounts, to buy their own policies and maintain them throughout their careers. This dramatically would reduce the tragedy of “job lock,” whereby employees put up with bosses and duties they cannot stand, merely to keep employer-furnished health coverage.

*********

Mark Steyn, Orange County Register, July 31, 2009
“No turning back from Obamacare”

How did the health-care debate decay to the point where we think it entirely natural for the central government to fix a collective figure for what 300 million freeborn citizens ought to be spending on something as basic to individual liberty as their own bodies?

*********

There is a lot of wisdom in the above articles, but I’m most impressed by the common sense of ordinary Americans, like the citizen from Pennsylvania who told Senator Spector: (Palin, 2009, ¶2)

“What I see is a bureaucratic nightmare, Senator. Medicaid is broke. Medicare is broke. Social Security is broke. And you want us to believe that a government that can’t even run a Cash for Clunkers program is going to run 1/7th of our U.S. economy?” (Palin, 2009, ¶3)

I couldn’t have said it better myself (Palin, 2009, ¶4).

–Sarah Palin

Commentary

Contrary to the opinions expressed by some, Governor Palin knows how to write and compose her thoughts. She has a journalism degree and was a sportscaster where she used that degree at a professional level. She writes her own speeches and knows them cold. Governor Palin cites and references everything. All her statements are researched, thought through, carefully considered, and backed up with facts and evidence. She does not “shoot from the hip.”

Governor Palin’s core values are based in large part on what is historically known to work, for she is student of history. Those of us who love and support Governor Palin are in many respects her students. We are proud to have her as our teacher.

References

Palin, S.L.H. (2009, August 8). “Some Useful Commentary on the Health Care Debate.” FaceBook, Sarah Palin. Retrieved August 8, 2009 from: http://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin?v=app_2347471856&viewas=1574531555#/note.php?note_id=114345578434

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »