Death panels...coming to your town

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-07-2010
Death panels...coming to your town
92
Thu, 07-08-2010 - 5:31pm

Obama's Nominee to Run Medicare: 'The Decision is Not Whether or Not We Will Ration Care--The Decision is Whether We Will Ration Care With Our Eyes Open'

(CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama’s nominee to head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs Medicare, is a strong supporter of the government-run health care system in Britain, who said in a 2009 interview about Comparative Effectiveness Research: “The decision is not whether or not we will ration care--the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

The $787-billion stimulus law signed by President Obama created a Federal Coordinating Coucil for Comparative Effectivieness research in health care that some critics argue was a step toward rationing of heatlh care in the United States.

Donald Berwick, a professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and the head of the non-profit Institute for Healthcare Improvement, was nominated by Obama on April 19, 2010.

In choosing Berwick, the Obama administration is implicitly admitting that the health care law passed by the Democrats in March will lead to the rationing of health care, said Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) in a May 19 press release.

Concerning Berwick’s 2009 comment about the rationing of health care, the White House released a statement to several news organizations in which spokesman Reid Cherlin said the following:

“No one is surprised that Republicans plan to use this confirmation process to trot out the same arguments and scare tactics they hoped would block health insurance reform. The fact is, rationing is rampant in the system today, as insurers make arbitrary decisions about who can get the care they need. Don Berwick wants to see a system in which those decisions are transparent– and that the people who make them are held accountable.”

The White House statement, according to Roberts, seemed to acknowledge that the new health care law would simply ration care in a transparent way.

“This is really a fascinating response. Instead of flat out denials of government rationing we have excuses,” Roberts said on the Senate floor on May 19.

“And if you read between the lines you will notice that for the first time ever in this debate the Obama White House is admitting that their health care plan will ration health care,” the senator said.

Roberts made it clear that he does not accept health care rationing “transparent or otherwise.”

“I am opposed to rationing whether it is done by the government or by an insurance company,” said Roberts. “I am not defending any of the practices of insurance companies who have unjustly denied claims. But the Obama Administration’s response does nothing to address my concerns that our government will ration care. Instead, we finally have an admission from the White House that this is what they plan to do.”

In a June 2009 interview in Biotechnology Healthcare, Berwick was asked: "Critics of CER (Comparative Effectiveness Research) have said that it will lead to rationing of health care."

He answered: "We can make a sensible social decision and say, 'Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds.' We make those decisio all the tim. The decision is not whether or not we will ration care--the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open."

In the same interview, he also said, “The social budget is limited—we have a limited resource pool. It makes terribly good sense to at least know the price of an added benefit, and at some point we might say nationally, regionally, or locally that we wish we could afford it, but we can’t.”

Berwick also talked about his romantic view of Britain’s socialized health care system on page 213 of a report he wrote entitled, “A Transatlantic Review of the NHS at 60,” published on July 26, 2008.

“Cynics beware: I am romantic about the National Health Service; I love it,” Berwick wrote. “All I need to do to rediscover the romance is to look at health care in my own country.”

In the same article, he wrote, “The NHS is one of the astounding human endeavors of modern times. … It’s easier in the United States because we do not promise health care as a human right.”

He further wrote, “Any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized, and humane must – must – redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and less fortunate.”

Roberts said he personally did not understand this romantic view of socialized medicine.

“With cancer survival rates for women 10 percentage points higher in the U.S. than in England, and over 20 points higher for men, why does he think that their government-run system is superior to our system?” said Roberts.

“Limited resources require decisions about who will have access to care and the extent of their coverage,” Berwick wrote in the Jan. 27, 1999 edition of Nursing Standard.

“The complexity and cost of healthcare delivery systems may set up a tension between what is good for the society as a whole and what is best for an individual patient,” Berwick wrote in an article entitled, “A Shared Statement of Ethical Principle.”

“Hence, those working in health care delivery may be faced with situations in which it seems that the best course is to manipulate the flawed system for the benefit of a specific patient or segment of the population, rather than to work to improve the delivery of care for all. Such manipulation produces more flaws, and the downward spiral continues.”

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/66465

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2009
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 9:55am

Well, if you're not interested in backing up your claims, then don't make them. I'm curious as to what sources you used of the nearly 4 million that came up during the search you suggested.


<<Starting from "scratch" means being deported...and applying from your mother country for immigrant status in the US and then going through all of the hoops to earn citizenship. That is the TRUE "back of the line" reality...but it's NOT what the Dems are referring to when they talk about "path to citizenship.">>


Yes but if we're unable to deport all 12 million illegals now, how would we do it in order to have them start from scratch? And what about the economic repercussions of a mass exodus of millions of people?


<>


Good luck deporting 12 million people. How long do you think that would take? And at what expense?


>>> And free health insurance, really? Who's offering free health insurance?


<<Obama.>>


<<< Proof please.


<


Again, this is all recent news and well reported...at least on Fox, if not other lame-street media outlets. Google a bit...get informed.>>


And AGAIN, proof please. You claimed that Obama is offering free health insurance for illegals. Back that claim up. If it's been reported as you claim then it should be easy to prove it. I did a search and was unable to find proof of free insurance for illegal immigrants and I even did a search on foxnews.com and did not come across it. Apparently it's not as well reported as you think.

Chrissy


Photobucket



Chrissy


iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2009
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 9:57am

Again, I have insurance through the government, as do those with Medicare, and the government does not control my actual care.


Chrissy


iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 1:20pm

"As I said in another post, supporting healthcare reform doesn't necessarily mean that you supported the actual healthcare bill that passed. "


What system would you support and how would it have fixed the problem? None of the systems propsed addressing the problem of cost containment.

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 1:22pm

Chrissy


iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 1:22pm

"Yes, I am aware of that. But the person that I replied to implied that you would have no recourse with 'government controlled' healthcare."


In the end you don't. You've mentioned Tricare. If someone believes Tricare failed them and wish to sue, the beneficiary must first ask permission from the government before they can sue the government.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 1:25pm

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-14-2010
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 1:29pm

"The insurance companies of course want the same thing but then, they also want a profit. Without a profit, what would be the point of them being in business? "


Coverage and profits are not the same thing. The more things insurance covers, the more profitable insurance companies are since they charge for the treatment + the profit margin together.


iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2009
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 2:44pm

"Yes, I am aware of that. But the person that I replied to implied that you would have no recourse with 'government controlled' healthcare."


<>




Nope. Tricare, like Medicare, is government funded but private corporations run it. I am certainly able to sue if all other appeals have been exhausted.

Chrissy


iVillage Member
Registered: 05-26-2009
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 2:49pm

Chrissy


iVillage Member
Registered: 07-07-2010
Sun, 07-11-2010 - 4:47pm

>>> So you don't think that the current private system is inefficient, overly expensive, and unsustainable over time?

Inefficient? No, not to any significant degree.

Overly expensive? Yes, from a consumer's perspective. But then, I also think that cars, TVs and sushi cost too much.

Unsustainable? No. The market will eventually correct any overt problems.

Pages