Iowa’s Grassley feeds the false euthanasia meme

Appearing at an Iowa town hall, U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley was asked by a constituent to “denounce the tactics that are getting thrown at the Democrats.”

“You know there is nothing in the House bill that will require any elderly person to stand before a committee and decide whether or not they are going to live or die,” the voter told Grassley. According to the Politico account, the roughly 200-person crowd booed.

Rather than tell the truth, Grassley pandered.

“With all the other fears people have and what they do in England then you get the idea that somebody is going to decide grandma lived too long,” said Grassley. “You understand why you get it. Now, the best thing to do if you want people to think about end of life number one — Jesus Christ is a place to start. It ought to be done within the family and considered an religious and ethical issue not something politicians decide.”

There is absolutely nothing in the House bill that would give government any say whatsoever over such intimate decisions. Grassley’s statement strikes me as the act of a coward or a fool.

Grassley has never struck me as a fool, but I could be wrong.

In this context, it’s important to remember what was undoubtedly the single most egregious case of political meddling in end-of-life decisions, the Republican-led effort by Congress to intervene in the tragic Terri Schiavo case. Grassley wasn’t on the Senate floor when that vote came in 2005, but the man who now claims that such decisions “ought to be done within the family and considered an religious and ethical issue, not something politicians decide” made his opinion clear.

“I support the effort to protect Terri Schiavo. It’s the first case of its kind, a chance to choose life over death. I gave the option to life,” he said at the time.

205 comments Add your comment

md

August 12th, 2009
5:52 pm

Considering the dems represent a group of people that believe it is ok to whack em before they even come into this world, it probably isn’t too far fetched to believe at some point they will want to whack em on the way out as well.

See Oregon.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
5:53 pm

Must not be on speaking terms with Johnny. I think he and some of the others that have been around for so long are getting senile. Thankfully Jim Bunning is retiring.

Disgusted

August 12th, 2009
5:56 pm

Grassley has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from health insurance companies. It’s a matter of public record, and those companies are his primary source of campaign funds. He had better do everything he can to defeat healthcare reform, even if that means spreading lies he knows are such and refusing to repudiate any scare tactics being used against the bills in committees.

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
5:57 pm

And to think, Grassley used to be a lib.

Or a fool, which ever you’d like to call it.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
5:58 pm

md

August 12th, 2009
5:52 pm

“Death With Dignity Act”

“On October 27, 1997 Oregon enacted the Death with Dignity Act which allows terminally-ill Oregonians to end their lives through the voluntary self-administration of lethal medications, expressly prescribed by a physician for that purpose. ”

http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/ph/pas/

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
5:59 pm

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
5:57 pm

Jay already decided he probably isn’t a fool.

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
6:05 pm

I think bookman doesn’t even understand the issue and, apparently, he thinks if he can say it isn’t “there” enough times, then it will somehow be true.

The government doesn’t have to “euthanasia” anyone and in fact, that would be murder.

They just have to deny you care, after your little mandatory conference, and let disease and suffering take it’s slow, agonizing course.

bookman defending this is a little creepy.

RW-(the original)

August 12th, 2009
6:06 pm

Barack Obama himself said that at some point in the aging process you’ve got to decide just to take a painkiller rather than have the operation.

md

August 12th, 2009
6:08 pm

Tn,

“We knew it would come to this when Oregon insisted on passing its assisted-suicide laws. It doesn’t take much for assisted suicide to go from a humane option to a cost-saving device, especially when the state pays for the medical care. One patient in Oregon got a letter that made this all too clear, when in the same letter rejecting her request for life-extending chemotherapy, Oregon offered her “physician-aid-in-dying”. In other words, Oregon offered their customer a heapin’ helping of death.

… the doctor interviewed by the news station seems offended at the suggestion that Oregon would decide to save a few bucks by denying expensive health care and offering a case of hemlock in its place. However, saving money was the raison d’etre of single-payer systems, and the incentives all drive towards that decision. Single-payer systems have to handle medical services as a shortage market, rationing them by using “comparative effectiveness” paradigms to determine who gets medical attention, and who gets “physician-aid-in-dying” instead of it.

The woman who drew the short end of the stick in this case wonders who these people think they are. They think they know better than us who needs to live and die. Has that lesson still not been made clear?”

N-GA

August 12th, 2009
6:14 pm

Any country that allows its citizens to choose to end their personal suffering with grace and dignity has elevated its level of personal freedom far beyond that of the unenlightened, backward-thinking self-righteous wingers who would rather impose their will on others. They talk-the-talk about personal freedoms, they just don’t walk-the-walk.

md

August 12th, 2009
6:17 pm

“One patient in Oregon got a letter that made this all too clear, when in the same letter rejecting her request for life-extending chemotherapy, Oregon offered her “physician-aid-in-dying”.”

And what would you call a country that makes the choice for you?

N-GA

August 12th, 2009
6:17 pm

There is no “mandatory conference”. There is simply a provision that authorizes payment to counselors who let people know what their rights are….unlike the wingnut-sponsored laws that require that women seeking abortions receive counseling.

What a bunch of HYPOCRITES!

Paul Veazey

August 12th, 2009
6:20 pm

I oppose virtually everything Obama, et al. say they want to do to and with health care and health insurance in America and probably would find little philosophical common ground with Mr. Bookman, whoever he is. I have, however, watched and listened to Mr. Grassley a good deal over the years and this I can say with confidence: he is a stupid as a post.

Chris Salzmann

August 12th, 2009
6:25 pm

RW-(the original) August 12th, 2009 6:06 pm SAID: Barack Obama himself said that at some point in the aging process you’ve got to decide just to take a painkiller rather than have the operation.

CHRIS SAYS: LMAO. Care to add the context or do you want me to do that for you?

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:25 pm

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
6:05 pm

Not getting a hip or knee replacement isn’t fatal.

FrankLeeDarling

August 12th, 2009
6:28 pm

“One patient in Oregon got a letter that made this all too clear, when in the same letter rejecting her request for life-extending chemotherapy, Oregon offered her “physician-aid-in-dying”.”

Care to back that up with proof,or is this something that came in your email from some right wing group. Care to tell us who sent this letter in the first place?

Chris Salzmann

August 12th, 2009
6:28 pm

RW-(the original) August 12th, 2009 6:06 pm SAID: Barack Obama himself said that at some point in the aging process you’ve got to decide just to take a painkiller rather than have the operation.

CHRIS SAYS: You’re really milking this one, aren’t you? And he also said at the same time that this is where families as well as doctors should be involved in the decision making process. Again, provide the context than parroting talking points you received with your Tea Party kit.

James R. Lewis

August 12th, 2009
6:29 pm

How unbelievable. Such a silly commentary on an important issue. Disagree if you will as you have the power of the pen. But keep your facts straight.

Grassley has never struck me as a fool, but I could be wrong. You sir are no doubt very wrong. Poison pen in the hands of one who thinks too much of himself.

That is inflammatory a statement as those ascribed to seniors attending district meetings with members of Congress.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:33 pm

md

August 12th, 2009
6:08 pm

A time to live, a time to die. In some cases it’s our decision.

“1For everything there is a season, and a time for very purpose under heaven: 2a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; 3a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; 4a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; 5a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; 6a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; 7a time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; 8a time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace.”

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Eccl.3.html

Chris Salzmann

August 12th, 2009
6:34 pm

U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley SAID: “I support the effort to protect Terri Schiavo. It’s the first case of its kind, a chance to choose life over death. I gave the option to life,” he said at the time.

CHRIS SAYS: So, according to this clown, its okay for the government to interfere in intimate and painful, personal family choices. And this from the same party and person that decries government involvement in health care insurance??? Anyone see the irony in this?

kent

August 12th, 2009
6:34 pm

N-GA You got it right.

MD Who provides your ins? I can only hoope that when your turn comes they keep you alive against your will and make you suffer. You must think Palin is the goddess of knowledge.

MOB WHINER Your the fool, Grassley just a polititian.

Steven Ertelt

August 12th, 2009
6:34 pm

Grassley is right, the bills present real concerns. See http://www.LifeNews.com/bio2916.html

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:36 pm

md

August 12th, 2009
6:17 pm

“One patient in Oregon got a letter that made this all too clear, when in the same letter rejecting her request for life-extending chemotherapy, Oregon offered her “physician-aid-in-dying”.”

If the cancer doesn’t kill you the treatment will. There is no guarantee the chemo would have extended her life. But we do know it would have made it miserable for the timee she was receiving it.

md

August 12th, 2009
6:38 pm

“Care to back that up with proof,or is this something that came in your email from some right wing group. Care to tell us who sent this letter in the first place?”

Decide for yourself – to me, one is too many:

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/08/03/video-oregon-says-no-to-chemotherapy-offers-assisted-suicide-instead/

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:38 pm

Paul Veazey

August 12th, 2009
6:20 pm

I was surprised he got reelected after the Clarence Thomas spectacle.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:42 pm

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Pentagon may want to consider scaling back Lockheed Martin Corp’s multinational F-35 fighter program, the costliest-ever U.S. arms-purchase plan, as part of stepped-up budget belt-tightening, an analysis by an influential research group said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090812/pl_nm/us_pentagon_budget_lockheed_1

md

August 12th, 2009
6:42 pm

“If the cancer doesn’t kill you the treatment will. There is no guarantee the chemo would have extended her life. But we do know it would have made it miserable for the timee she was receiving it.”

Thats not the point. I don’t need some flunky in the gov’t making that kind of decision for me – thats the point.

And for Kent – thats some intelligent debate there. Keep up the good work.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:44 pm

Refresh, doggone it!

RW-(the original)

August 12th, 2009
6:44 pm

DoggoneGA

August 12th, 2009
6:45 pm

“I don’t need some flunky in the gov’t making that kind of decision for me – thats the point”

Oh sure, but a flunky at the insurance company? Now that’s OK.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
6:46 pm

Of course they need to save money by letting you die. How else is everyone going to keep getting their free government handouts like Section 8 Housing, Food Stamps, WIC, Welfare, State Health Insurance, free cheese, milk and eggs and on and on and on……
Dependency breeds dependency.
Captivity creates infantilism.
Dracula was a metaphor for what the State is doing to us.
Immortal Entity sucks the life blood out of you.
It’s not Socialism, it’s Communism.

tpartier (no - not one of THOSE morons)

August 12th, 2009
6:47 pm

For all of you who are TOO LAZY to read the section you are utterly twisting here it is:

SEC. 1233. ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION.

(a) Medicare-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended–

(A) in subsection (s)(2)–

(i) by striking `and’ at the end of subparagraph (DD);

(ii) by adding `and’ at the end of subparagraph (EE); and

(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

`(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));’; and

(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`Advance Care Planning Consultation

`(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term `advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:

`(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.

`(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.

`(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.

`(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).

`(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.

`(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include–

`(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;

`(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; and

`(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).

`(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State–

`(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; and

`(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).

`(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that–

`(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;

`(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;

`(III) provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; and

`(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.

`(2) A practitioner described in this paragraph is–

`(A) a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)); and

`(B) a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant who has the authority under State law to sign orders for life sustaining treatments.

`(3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination under subsection (WW), including any related discussion during such examination, shall not be considered an advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).

`(B) An advance care planning consultation with respect to an individual may be conducted more frequently than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual, including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a hospice program.

`(4) A consultation under this subsection may include the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order.

`(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term `order regarding life sustaining treatment’ means, with respect to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to the treatment of that individual that–

`(i) is signed and dated by a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)) or another health care professional (as specified by the Secretary and who is acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law in signing such an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician assistant) and is in a form that permits it to stay with the individual and be followed by health care professionals and providers across the continuum of care;

`(ii) effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual;

`(iii) is uniquely identifiable and standardized within a given locality, region, or State (as identified by the Secretary); and

`(iv) may incorporate any advance directive (as defined in section 1866(f)(3)) if executed by the individual.

`(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items–

`(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;

`(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;

`(iii) the use of antibiotics; and

`(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.’.

(2) PAYMENT- Section 1848(j)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(j)(3)) is amended by inserting `(2)(FF),’ after `(2)(EE),’.

(3) FREQUENCY LIMITATION- Section 1862(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)) is amended–

(A) in paragraph (1)–

(i) in subparagraph (N), by striking `and’ at the end;

(ii) in subparagraph (O) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting `, and’; and

(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

`(P) in the case of advance care planning consultations (as defined in section 1861(hhh)(1)), which are performed more frequently than is covered under such section;’; and

(B) in paragraph (7), by striking `or (K)’ and inserting `(K), or (P)’.

(4) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to consultations furnished on or after January 1, 2011.

(b) Expansion of Physician Quality Reporting Initiative for End of Life Care-

(1) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE- Section 1848(k)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(k)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:

`(3) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE-

`(A) IN GENERAL- For purposes of reporting data on quality measures for covered professional services furnished during 2011 and any subsequent year, to the extent that measures are available, the Secretary shall include quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a consensus-based organization, if appropriate. Such measures shall measure both the creation of and adherence to orders for life-sustaining treatment.

`(B) PROPOSED SET OF MEASURES- The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that the Secretary determines are described in subparagraph (A) and would be appropriate for eligible professionals to use to submit data to the Secretary. The Secretary shall provide for a period of public comment on such set of measures before finalizing such proposed measures.’.

(c) Inclusion of Information in Medicare & You Handbook-

(1) MEDICARE & YOU HANDBOOK-

(A) IN GENERAL- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall update the online version of the Medicare & You Handbook to include the following:

(i) An explanation of advance care planning and advance directives, including–

(I) living wills;

(II) durable power of attorney;

(III) orders of life-sustaining treatment; and

(IV) health care proxies.

(ii) A description of Federal and State resources available to assist individuals and their families with advance care planning and advance directives, including–

(I) available State legal service organizations to assist individuals with advance care planning, including those organizations that receive funding pursuant to the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 93001 et seq.);

(II) website links or addresses for State-specific advance directive forms; and

(III) any additional information, as determined by the Secretary.

(B) UPDATE OF PAPER AND SUBSEQUENT VERSIONS- The Secretary shall include the information described in subparagraph (A) in all paper and electronic versions of the Medicare & You Handbook that are published on or after the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Now – wherein there did you find anything but compassion? Where did you find any mandate for anything? Did you happen to notice the encouragement of a trusted relative or friend to make decisions in proxy for you?

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
6:47 pm

TN- I don’t recall that being any of yours or anybody else’s business.

Oh, I forgot, it will if this bill passes.

Look at these libs, they have entered the new age of enlightenment and splendor where they are able to give grandma the old heave ho from the health care system.

fools.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:47 pm

md

August 12th, 2009
6:42 pm

Insurance companies make that decision every day. It’s a touchy issue and very personal. If it was a mandatory consultation I could understand your point more. Have you visited a nursing home lately? Lord, have mercy on our souls.

DoggoneGA

August 12th, 2009
6:51 pm

“they are able to give grandma the old heave ho from the health care system.”

Liar

tpartier (no - not one of THOSE morons)

August 12th, 2009
6:51 pm

Steve Ertelt – no need to read the propaganda – just read the actual content of the bill – I’ve posted it for you above.

md

August 12th, 2009
6:51 pm

“Oh sure, but a flunky at the insurance company? Now that’s OK.”

Assumptions make you look silly. Try again.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
6:51 pm

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
6:47 pm

Yeah, we’re foolish to think we should be able to decide if we want risky, expensive treatment or to go peacefully into the night.

Randal Davis. Portland, OR

August 12th, 2009
6:52 pm

What is it called when your health insurance company denies your claim and you die?

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
6:53 pm

Here’s $4500 for a new car – welcome to Commie Land
Here’s Free Health Insurance – welcome to Commie Land
Let’s take over 2 of 3 Car Manufacturers – welcome to Commie Land
Let’s Take over the Banks – Welcome to Commie Land
WHATS NEXT? CAUSE THERE AIN’T MUCH LEFT!

md

August 12th, 2009
6:53 pm

“Insurance companies make that decision every day. It’s a touchy issue and very personal. If it was a mandatory consultation I could understand your point more. Have you visited a nursing home lately? Lord, have mercy on our souls.”

I’m not basing my concerns on this particular bill, but rather decisions made by others with like philosophies, such as Oregon.

“Give an inch they take a mile”

DoggoneGA

August 12th, 2009
6:55 pm

“What is it called when your health insurance company denies your claim and you die?”

Profit-making decisions

DoggoneGA

August 12th, 2009
6:56 pm

“welcome to Commie Land”

Don’t know much about communism, do you?

md

August 12th, 2009
6:57 pm

“What is it called when your health insurance company denies your claim and you die?”

A shame. But one would have the courts at their disposal prior to death in that situation. One can not sue the gov’t if they deny your claim.

Eddy

August 12th, 2009
6:57 pm

Ezekial Emmanuel, the resident ethicist and bro of Rahm, will establish all of the many guiding principles so that all denials of care are ethical; all terminations meet the ethical guidelines and no one is treated unethically thus violating the ethical principles. If these guys weren’t so scary, this would make an excellent Monty Python skit. Doncha’ just love it when such a misguided proposal falls apart because of hubris!!!! “Don’t the little people know who I am” As Gomer would say: ‘Surprise, surprise!! The groundswell of the little people has just begun. Perhaps O acted “stupidly”!

Taxpayer

August 12th, 2009
6:58 pm

Some terminally ill patients in Oregon who turned to their state for health care were denied treatment and offered doctor-assisted suicide instead… Since the spread of his prostate cancer, 53-year-old Randy Stroup of Dexter, Ore., uninsured and unable to pay for expensive chemotherapy, has been in a fight for his life. He applied to Oregon’s state-run health plan for help and received a letter in reply. “It dropped my chin to the floor,” Stroup told FOX News. “[How could they] not pay for medication that would help my life, and yet offer to pay to end my life?” The letter, which has been sent to other terminal patients throughout Oregon, follows guidelines established by the state legislature.

Oregon doesn’t cover life-prolonging treatment unless there is better than a 5 percent chance it will help the patients live for five more years — but it covers doctor-assisted suicide, defining it as a means of providing comfort, no different from hospice care or pain medication.

Now, why would anyone want to try and politicize something such as this. In fact, some of the very same people that would bring up this case and criticize Oregon’s legislation as not going far enough would then turn around and criticize Massachusetts, for example, for offering such care and going in the hole for it. Yet, these people will not even acknowledge that their own insurance companies do the very same thing, or worse. It’s really just all about doing nothing but saying no for these people, the conservative Republicans. The party of losers.

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
7:01 pm

TN- Let me try to simplify this so even you can understand-

You buy a new car with a warranty. The engine expires. So do tell us, we would love to hear, all about the conference you would have with your mechanic on whether your car is worth fixing or not, hahahahahahaha.

I rule.

Speaktruth

August 12th, 2009
7:01 pm

There is so much INTENTIONAL DISINFORMATION being spewed that one must conclude the “spewers” are paid shills for big insurance. There is no “mandatory conference” there is no euthanasia, there is no “death panel.” Oregon’s passage of the Death with Dignity Act was not a cost saving measure, nor was it a democrat versus republican issue – it was an issue of personal freedom in the face of terminal illness.

We are all already subject to “rationing” of health care in this country – it is done by INSURANCE COMPANIES with only profit as a motive, and, with consolidation of the insurance market, there are fewer and fewer, but larger and larger, insurance companies with huge chunks of the market and no incentive to compete. Its easier for them to simply fix prices and deny coverage – where else are we going to go? They know they are the only game in town and they want to keep it that way.

The majority of people who are afraid of health insurance reform are not well informed about their own health insurance coverage, or lack thereof. Wait until you make a health insurance claim. You will be amazed at the length to which health insurers go to obfuscate, complicate, delay, and flat-out lie to avoid paying the bills that they agreed to when you paid the premiums.

We have many years of experience with government management of health care through the Medicare program. Physicians will overwhelmingly agree that Medicare is much easier to deal with than insurance companies. Medicare pays better (despite Medicare’s lower reimbursement rates, insurers’ actual payments under PPO provider contracts or HMO plans is less than half of “usual and customary”); Medicare pays faster ( insurers often do not pay until 4 – 6 months after billing) and Medicare does not interpose claims “minions” to deny or delay coverage based upon utilization review issues raised by in-house quacks paid to limit access to care.

The bottom line – this is NOT about health CARE reform – this is about health INSURANCE reform. The special interests will spend a lot of money to scare people into scuttling what we all desperately need – health insurance reform.

RedState Ronald

August 12th, 2009
7:02 pm

The elderly should have absolutely NO SAY in the way their final days are spent. If they are cancer-ridden, they should have the DIGNITY to go through crippling, debilitating chemo-therapy instead of passing their final days at home with family or in a peaceful hospice setting. Those with alzheimers should have the DIGNITY to waste away in a haze of confusion and panic until their bedsores become infected and gangrenous. Modern medicine has brought us to this point, and PAYING a doctor to discuss OPTIONS with anyone who would have the GALL to deny medical help smacks of SOCIALISM to me. This is AMERICA people!!!

md

August 12th, 2009
7:03 pm

“Now, why would anyone want to try and politicize something such as this. In fact, some of the very same people that would bring up this case and criticize Oregon’s legislation as not going far enough would then turn around and criticize Massachusetts, for example, for offering such care and going in the hole for it. Yet, these people will not even acknowledge that their own insurance companies do the very same thing, or worse. It’s really just all about doing nothing but saying no for these people, the conservative Republicans. The party of losers.”

Can’t speak for the conservative republicans you mention, but I can speak for myself as a registered independent and comdemn both.

What a novel idea, huh.

Its wrong when the insurance companies do it and its dang sure wrong when gov’t does it. How hard is that to understand.

FrankLeeDarling

August 12th, 2009
7:04 pm

md ,LIPA the insurance company that turned down the woman in your link is a private group run by doctors it has nothing to do with the state of Oregon.
This is straight from their site: Lipa is a physician based organization committed to working in
partnership with local providers and other community based
resources to assure access to high quality health care for all
Oregonians within the communities it serves.

Lane Oregon Health Plan was launched by Lipa for the purpose of providing health care to low-income Oregonians eligible for the OHP in Lane County, Oregon. The primary goal of this program is to increase access to high quality health care for these individuals.

It sound more like private health groups finding ways not to cover people.

HolyKow

August 12th, 2009
7:04 pm

Give me freedom to make my own choice. If you dont want into the public option, keep your private option until you get sick and they deny your coverage (their own version of death with not dignity but with destitution and heartache) and you die waiting for appeal. All of you people that do not want this Health Care Bill to be a reality fall in 1 of 2 catagories:

1) You have never been sick and had your expensive care denied by the corrupt current health care system. If you don’t think it can happen, look at Katrina and all the people that the insurance people screwed over when they were legally covered and the got NOTHING! I am from New Orleans and I know so many people that got screwed by those vultures. Thinking that your current health care will not F you in the A as soon as they get the change is denial, pure and simple.

2) You are one of the lowest common denominator jack holes that thinks that just going to these town hall meeting and calling Americans Nazis and just vomiting the GOP Rush/O’Reily baseless racist un-factual plain bald face lies is their god given right under the constitution and it is a great idea.

We are the last ‘Modern Industrialized’ Nation that does not have an option for health care in the WORLD. The bass-ackwards racist Confederates that make up most of the GOP are a blight on this county.

Ben

August 12th, 2009
7:05 pm

Every needs to read the Proposed Bill 3200. Talk is cheep when one doen’t have the Facts. Fact according to the Proposed Bill 3200. Pg.30 Sec 123, Pg 42. Pg 58.Pg 59. Pg 72. 8-14 Pg 84. Sec203 Pg 85.-7 Pg 102 12-18 Pg 167 . 18-23 Pg 195. Pg 203 14-15 Pg 265.1131 Pg 341. 3-9 Pg 379. Sec 1191 Pg 425 17-19 Pg 502 Sec 1181 Pg 503 13-19 Pg 504 6-10 Pg 524 18-22 Pg 711 8-14 Pg 735 16-25 Pg 801 Sec 1751 . I Have skipped several in between and the list goes on this Bill as proposed is bad and everyone needs to read it. Don’t be fooled. There is 1018 pages to the bill. Here is the Link.

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

Please read it and maybe what we see on TV town hall meetings ARE NOT ORGANIZED. They are real people with concerns and want answers. Remeber Our Elected Officials Work for Us and not the Democrat,Republician or Independent Partys. Hold there feet to the Fire. Thaqnks for Letting us Vent

tpartier (no - not one of THOSE morons)

August 12th, 2009
7:06 pm

md – the courst were not there to save the 17 y.o. girl a few years back when multiple doctors recommended that CIGNA – in its wisdom – told the family to take a hike repeatedly – until about 4 hours before her death.

Don’t be so naive – courts do not adjourn at the drop of a dime. They further require extensive preparations and delaying tactics are sure to ensue. Quit insulting our intelligence, please.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:07 pm

I know a lot about commies
In Commie Land EVERYTHINGS FREE!!!!!!
Where do I sign up? I want my free sheet

md

August 12th, 2009
7:07 pm

“The bottom line – this is NOT about health CARE reform – this is about health INSURANCE reform. The special interests will spend a lot of money to scare people into scuttling what we all desperately need – health insurance reform.”

Wrong, its about a partisan option for health insurance reform. No compromise, no debate, my side won and by golly this is what you get. That is what it is about.

HolyKow

August 12th, 2009
7:07 pm

Oh yeah, and the idea that finding Jesus will ease your Pancreatic Cancer pain is an insult to anyone that has achieved the ability to think for themselves. F*@K Jesus, give me the freedom to choose my end on my terms in a humane fashion. Thank god for Oregon’s law and may it be adopted by all 50 states as soon as possible.

HK

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
7:07 pm

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
6:53 pm

Come back in 3 years and tell us about it. They’re only temporary, emergency measures.

md

August 12th, 2009
7:08 pm

“md ,LIPA the insurance company that turned down the woman in your link is a private group run by doctors it has nothing to do with the state of Oregon.”

Wrong, its administered by an insurance company, the ultimate decision making powers lie with the State.

tpartier (no - not one of THOSE morons)

August 12th, 2009
7:08 pm

something went wrong here

MD
The courts were not there to save the 17 y.o. girl a few years back when multiple doctors recommended that she have a transplant. CIGNA – in its wisdom – told the family to take a hike repeatedly – until about 4 hours before her death.

Don’t be so naive – courts do not adjourn at the drop of a dime. They further require extensive preparations and delaying tactics are sure to ensue. Quit insulting our intelligence, please.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:09 pm

2 TRILLION DINEROS FOR ILLEGALS TO HEALTH COVERAGE

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:10 pm

HEY

GET IN MY FACE…

YOUR BELOVED LEADER NEEDS DEFENDING

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:10 pm

HEY

PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD

COMRADE O NEEDS DEFENDING

md

August 12th, 2009
7:11 pm

“md – the courst were not there to save the 17 y.o. girl a few years back when multiple doctors recommended that CIGNA – in its wisdom – told the family to take a hike repeatedly – until about 4 hours before her death.

Don’t be so naive – courts do not adjourn at the drop of a dime. They further require extensive preparations and delaying tactics are sure to ensue. Quit insulting our intelligence, please.”

Maybe you are not aware that only the gov’t can give one the right to sue the gov’t. What a bunch of bs that is.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:12 pm

what about making the IRS an enforcement mechanism with electronic access to your bank account…. to fine you if you don’t have ‘approved’ coverage?

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
7:13 pm

I Report/ I Am The Mob :-) You Whine :-(

August 12th, 2009
7:01 pm

Yeah, like a car is a living, breathing, thinking thing. There are no warranties in life. Nobody said it was going to be easy. When it comes our time we have to make the tough decisions, and this bill allows you to and encourages you to keep your wishes updated.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:13 pm

or the required visits to EVERYONE by Child WELFARE AGENCIES to determine if you are raising your kid right??

FrankLeeDarling

August 12th, 2009
7:13 pm

md, prove it

Finn McCool

August 12th, 2009
7:13 pm

Nathan Deal announces tele-town hall meetings

What a Man that Nathan Deal is. Can’t even face his constituents.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:14 pm

maybe they will test everyone for drug use????? DON’T THINK SO……… too many druggie libs would HOWL!!!!

md

August 12th, 2009
7:16 pm

“md, prove it”

Google is your friend, educate yourself. It is a State run program.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
7:16 pm

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:10 pm

Tough as nails. Discouraging isn’t it? No more panty-waisted liberals to kick around.

alaskyfeller

August 12th, 2009
7:16 pm

Alluns you folk who have commy nist papas, mamas, brothers, sises, unks, aunts, cuzins and other kin on that damn commy nist guvmint owned & run social curity an meddy care make me puke.

You commy nist have runned this kuntry. Ta hell wid you alluns.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:17 pm

quick report these disparaging remarks to the obama thought police… send out a twitter tweet to all your like minded brainless commie pals…. bum rush the forum and drown out all opposing thought and speech

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
7:17 pm

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:13 pm

That’s a damn good idea! Maybe we could end the cycle of ignorance, bigotry and poverty in GA.

TnGelding

August 12th, 2009
7:18 pm

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:17 pm

We don’t have to. Bush already set it up for him.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:18 pm

isn’t a “gelding” a de-nutted horse….. how appropriate….. HARDY HAR HAR

FrankLeeDarling

August 12th, 2009
7:21 pm

md,states set standards but LIPA could have covered the woman if they chose to. the statet of oregan say you have to cover a person if the chance of survival is better than five percent.The drug mentioned is still very untested.Should the state pay the pharma companies to use patients as guinea pigs?

Hemi

August 12th, 2009
7:22 pm

Boy (md) you must have a brain the size of a pea. What group of people do the Dems represent that believe it’s ok to whack’em before they even come into this world? Ya know, it’s pretty funny how you don’t want the Dems poking around in your healthcare, but it’s OK for you to poke around in an individual’s right to choose. They have a name for this, don’t they? Oh yeah, now I remember, it’s Hypocrite.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:25 pm

RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHAT? PROMISCUITY? UNPROTECTED SEX? HAVING OTHER PEOPLE PAY YOUR WAY FROM CRADLE TO GRAVE?

Speaktruth

August 12th, 2009
7:25 pm

“ ‘What is it called when your health insurance company denies your claim and you die?” A shame. But one would have the courts at their disposal prior to death in that situation. One can not sue the gov’t if they deny your claim.”

Wrong – ever try to sue a health insurer lately? You get claims of ERISA preemption of all state law remedies and regulations, you get claims that you need to pursue mandatory administrative procedures before suit can be filed, you get mandatory arbitration clauses, etc. etc. You get delay. You get bad faith practices intended to allow enough time to pass to render the issue moot. And on top of that, you get claims that we need to cut out “frivolous lawsuits.”

getalife

August 12th, 2009
7:26 pm

I rarely agree with Sen. Isakson but this is his cause and he is correct on this issue.

Too bad he will not lead on his cause and allow deathers to keep feeding the cons lies.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:27 pm

so because of ERISA we should all become commies

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:28 pm

aren’t any of you weak minded liberals going to play the race card?

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:30 pm

If you oppose President Obama you MUST be a racist……………….
Come on, we have all heard it for 40 years, it never gets old

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:32 pm

Stalin and Mao weren’t (insert politically correct racial description here) and I hate them too

Finn McCool

August 12th, 2009
7:32 pm

I must commend Jay and his blog as I just went to the Gainesville Times and they have no blogs so I gave em an earful.

If nothing else, this allows us to just vent. Let’s keep it civil.

Finn McCool

August 12th, 2009
7:36 pm

Jay, in honor of Ted Kennedy’s recent acceptance of a Medal of Freedom from the President, let’s ask everyone to describe their biggest screw up.

This would be goo to hear…very few of us have gone through life perfectly…let’s have a forum (you can hide your name) to say what really affected you.

Wow, this Internet thing…

for real

August 12th, 2009
7:36 pm

Euthanize the libs.

rcs

August 12th, 2009
7:37 pm

Finn,
John Lewis also changed his meeting to a tele-meeting. This surprised me because of his unquestionable courage in the civil rights movement.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:37 pm

Is Guantanamo closed yet?
Are the troops out of Iraq yet?
Did O support Civil Unions or file a Federal Brief against it?
Have 2 million more jobs been lost in the last 6 months?
Has the Patriot act been rescinded?
What’s CHANGED????
O Yeah…… Commie Land, that’s change.

Finn McCool

August 12th, 2009
7:40 pm

for real, second…… (exhale),

Dude, we are doing that (cough…cough)..ourselves!

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:41 pm

Hemi

August 12th, 2009
7:42 pm

Gimme my Free Handout- Didn’t I spank you on You Tube yesterday? What was that you said to me, go get your free hand out in some Dictator driven socialist country? Ha Ha! How come I didn’t get a reply after calling ya a Putz?

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:47 pm

Dusty

August 12th, 2009
7:48 pm

Surprise, folks!!! People have been dying for eons without any help from the government., Now all of a sudden, WE MUST HAVE IT. Who says so? Obviously not the poeple as there is a great outcry against this program and for good reason.. It is not the business of the government..

As to libs, you make it your business to agree too loudly. You WANT to agree with Obama. You WANT to agree with Bookman. You WANT to be a good scout Democrat and get your pats and laughs. You even WANT some support system to carry you out of this world. You can’t even do that by yourself with your family and doctor.

Wimps awailing as usual..

Surely there is something in this health bill that says SOMEONE will wipe your nose when you have a cold. You should NOT have to do that yourself! Liberals declare their desire to be dependant and I believe they are. They despise those who do not follow the herd of the helpless… This is a baaaaaaadd expensive debt-enlarging SOCIALISTIC health bill and liberals love it. Figures.

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:48 pm

CAUSE ME AND YOUR SISTER WERE BUSY DOWN AT THE CLINIC

Finn McCool

August 12th, 2009
7:49 pm

But Deal is a Republican, he saw this a chance to sit on his butt at home or play golf.

wussssssssssssssss

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:52 pm

She insisted she had the right to “choose” whether your future nephew would come into this world. I tried to talk her out of it, but, sadly, like all Liberals, she just wouldn’t listen to reason

Gimme my Free Handout

August 12th, 2009
7:56 pm

was the little girl asking questions at Obama’s Health Care Reform Revival Tent meeting a plant? Her Mother was a Dem Delegate to the National Convention? Astro-Turfing?
SAY IT AIN’T SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO