« Jim DeMint to Force Vote on Constitutionality of Mandate for Individuals to Purchase Health Insurance | Main | "Teach them to watch the star that leads to the baby" »

Sarah Palin: 'Democrats are protecting this rationing "death panel" from future change'

Sarahcuda is reporting something you won't be reading much of in the MSM:

Last weekend while you were preparing for the holidays with your family, Harry Reid's Senate was making shady backroom deals to ram through the Democrat health care take-over. The Senate ended debate on this bill without even reading it. That and midnight weekend votes seem to be standard operating procedures in D.C. No one is certain of what's in the bill, but Senator Jim DeMint spotted one shocking revelation regarding the section in the bill describing the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (now called the Independent Payment Advisory Board), which is a panel of bureaucrats charged with cutting health care costs on the backs of patients - also known as rationing. Apparently Reid and friends have changed the rules of the Senate so that the section of the bill dealing with this board can't be repealed or amended without a 2/3 supermajority vote. Senator DeMint said:

"This is a rule change. It's a pretty big deal. We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. I'm not even sure that it's constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. I don't see why the majority party wouldn't put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates. I mean, we want to bind future congresses. This goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future congresses."

In other words, Democrats are protecting this rationing "death panel" from future change with a procedural hurdle. You have to ask why they're so concerned about protecting this particular provision. Could it be because bureaucratic rationing is one important way Democrats want to "bend the cost curve" and keep health care spending down?

Seen that reported anywhere on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, NPR or the Washington Post, LA Time, New York Times, Time or Newsweek?

Of course not... doesn't fit the meme you right wing-nazi-fascist-tea-baggin'-redneck-bigot.

Crossposted(*).


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/37658.

Comments (29)

This bill is going to conti... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

This bill is going to continue to drag out, and will end up in court. Obama is now making noises that the bill won't be signed until February. Seems he's become preoccupied with JOBS and THE DEFICIT. Guess someone in the White House has suddenly started reading the national polls.

Nice to see that the "Lie o... (Below threshold)
Sabre5:

Nice to see that the "Lie of the Year" is alive and well on the fringy edge of the fringiest.

Sabre5: "Lie of the Year... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

Sabre5: "Lie of the Year" is alive and well on the fringy edge of the fringiest.

Wow...I can only assume you're referencing Sarah's comment on "Death Panels".

You're correct, Sabre5, they didn't CALL them "Death Panels".

They are Medical Efficiency Review Boards. And yes, they WILL have the power to determine actuarial tables that will in turn be used to deny coverage based on the age of the person and their projected "usefulness to society".

Britain already uses such a system.

Death Panels? Nah. They're Denial Of Life panels...vastly different, of course.

Make not mistake. It was a ... (Below threshold)
Sabre5:

Make not mistake. It was a lie then, and it's a lie now.

The former governor of Alaska had been out of the headlines since she announced her resignation on July 3; the Facebook message instantly brought her back to the political stage.

"As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we're saying not just no, but hell no!" Palin wrote.

"The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

And such a statement is a downright lie.

But the lies roll on. The liars can't stop themselves - their hate drives them forward, compelling them to lie again and again and again.

"But the lies roll on. The ... (Below threshold)
sam:

"But the lies roll on. The liars can't stop themselves - their hate drives them forward, compelling them to lie again and again and again."

Are you dissing on Obama?

Demoncrats love to pick and... (Below threshold)
914:

Demoncrats love to pick and choose who lives or dies. See Abortion, Waco and the newest proposed edition ObamaScare which will effectively streamline Granny,Grampa and those troublesome handicapped burdens on society's lifespans to a more cost effective use of Big Guv's cash.

Why would anyone on this si... (Below threshold)
WorldCitizen:

Why would anyone on this site be worried about death panels? They are only going to be used to put down the old lazy liberals that rely on the government for health care. No conservative will be affected by the government death panels because no conservative would be stupid enough to buy into the government run health care option. Private plans will still be available one way or another. Market forces have to be trusted to continue to make affordable health care available. The free market will win out like it always does. All conservatives are hardworking and forward planning enough to avoid poverty, therefore will be able to pay for their own and their family's health care.

Well, Sabre5, let's get som... (Below threshold)
Jeff Medcalf:

Well, Sabre5, let's get some specifics, then. I'll break down the quote you give into claims, and you tell us which claims are lies. Before I get there, though, would you agree that the definition of a lie is a statement known by its maker to be false, intended to decieve? I hate to have to get to definitions of common words first, but "lie" has already been a problem, so that's the way it "is".

I have given Palin's quotes letters, for easy reference, and extracted the claims (with rhetorical flourishes removed) and given them numbers, again for easy reference. Questions follow, with no numbers or letters.

(A) "As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we're saying not just no, but hell no!"

(1) More Americans were, at that time, looking at the details of the bills on healthcare that were then being considered.
(2) Those bills contained details that were disturbing to some people.
(3) The current administration was, at that time, planning on rushing the bills through Congress.

Was (1) a false statement? Were more people not then paying attention to the details of the healthcare proposals?
Was (2) a false statement? Were people not becoming disturbed by the details of the proposals?
Was (3) a false statement? Was the administration not trying to rush a bill through Congress as quickly as it could?

Next part of the quote:

(B) "The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost."

(4) Democrats promised that a government health care system would reduce the cost of health care.
(5) Thomas Sowell is an economist.
(6) Thomas Sowell said that government health care would not reduce the cost of health care, but that government would refuse to pay the cost. In effect, Sowell claims that government will ration care in order to keep the cost of health care down.

Was (4) a false statement? Did Democrats not make this claim?
Was (5) a false statement? Is Sowell not an economist? (Whether or not an argument from authority is a good argument is off topic, given that you are not claiming Palin made a bad argument, but that she lied.)
Was (6) a false statement? If so, was it a false statement by Palin or by Sowell? In other words, did Sowell not make the claim, or was Sowell's claim false?

(C) "And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course."

(7)The sick, elderly and disabled would suffer if care were rationed.

Was (7) a false statement? If care were rationed, would the sick, elderly and disabled not suffer?

(D) "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

(8) The proposal (and, indeed, the bills that have so far emerged) included panels of bureacrats to ration care.
(9) This rationing would be based on some formula for determining the "level of productivity in society" for a person seeking care, to determine if they were worth spending the resources on.
(10) Such a system is evil.

Was (8) a false statement? Were no government panels proposed to determine who should get which treatments paid for?
Was (9) a false statement? Were these panels given no method of determining how to ration care?
Was (10) a false statement? Is such a system not evil?

Palin is correct.A... (Below threshold)
Hank:

Palin is correct.

Althouse put it well.

"She doesn't say that the government will kill disabled (or elderly) persons directly, but that death will occur as a result of the decisions of cost controlling bureaucrats with the power to determine who can receive various treatments."

This is consistent with the views expressed by one of BarryO's key health advisors, Rahm's brother, Ezekial Emanuel who wrote:
"Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions,"

Check out his views on the so-called "complete lives system".

Jeff,Just a quick ... (Below threshold)
WorldCitizen:

Jeff,

Just a quick question on your "C". The quote is..."And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course."

Then your question.."If care were rationed, would the sick, elderly and disabled not suffer?"

Which is it? If or when?

WorldCitizen, see (6). Sowe... (Below threshold)
Jeff Medcalf:

WorldCitizen, see (6). Sowell is making the claim that this will lead to rationing. Palin accepts that claim. My question says 'if', not 'when', because I am trying to be neutral and take no stance on whether or not the claims are correct. Instead, I am trying to get Sabre5 to defend his accusation of lying by being specific, so that we can all talk about whether or not Palin lied on some kind of reasonable ground, rather than by simply grunting at each other. Of course, you are welcome to answer the questions as well.

Which is it? If or... (Below threshold)
Eric:
Which is it? If or when?

That's a good question. The thing about rationing is that it isn't necessarily the sick, elderly or disabled who are affected. Look at the recent controversy surrounding another advisory panel, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) which recommended the following:

* Routine screening of average-risk women should begin at age 50, instead of age 40.

* Routine screening should end at age 74.

* Women should get screening mammograms every two years instead of every year.

* Breast self-exams have little value, based on findings from several large studies.

This is the kind of rationing that is in question. What about the normally healthy women between 40 and 50 who may die because an advisory panel rationed away their care?

worldsheepizin ...... (Below threshold)
jeff:

worldsheepizin ...

maybe you didn't read the bill ? The panel sets the standards for insurance coverage, which the bill then REQUIRES private insurance to follow ...
so EVERY insurance plan in America, private or otherwise will be following those guidelines (except the one that Congress uses, they are exempt) ...
you'll notice that you liberals only care about issues that will effect your special interest groups while conservatives care about issues that effect all Americans ... kind of a big picture vs a special interest view of the world ...

Conspiracies uncovered so f... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

Conspiracies uncovered so far:

Global Black Helicopter Fleets √
FEMA Detention Camps √
Obama Hypnotizing Children During Back-to-School Address √
White House Christmas Ornament as Propaganda √
Death Panels √

w citizen "no conserva... (Below threshold)
Marc:

w citizen "no conservative would be stupid enough to buy into the government run health care option."

So... you're saying all those twenty somethings that are healthy and buy a new car or pay for college instead of health insurance and NOW under a new mandate MUST buy health insurance are what?

Stupid conservatives?

Happy campers?

Just what are they nitwit?

Eric "Look at the rece... (Below threshold)
Marc:

Eric "Look at the recent controversy surrounding another advisory panel, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) which recommended the following:"

Look that sometime actor turned gov of California. As a cost cutting measure he just decreed his state do just that, follow the new USPSTF guidelines.

a browne "Conspiracies... (Below threshold)
Marc:

a browne "Conspiracies uncovered so far:"

Printing of a browne's humaniod birth certificate.

Marc,Let me start ... (Below threshold)
WorldCitizen:

Marc,

Let me start out where you left off, you are a nitwit.

There is NO mandate to buy health insurance. Unless some piece of legislation passed both houses and was signed to by the president that I don't know about.

You like many are going to tell me all about the terror of a bill that you have not read and has not passed and will not be in the form that it is in not.

Scare me again.

Wait a second, World Citize... (Below threshold)
Jeff Medcalf:

Wait a second, World Citizen. Are you seriously trying to make the argument that there is no mandate because the bill is not yet signed into law? So then, if a bill is brought up that requires forced conversion to [insert religion here], then we shouldn't worry about it, because it hasn't passed into law yet?

w citzen "There is NO ... (Below threshold)
Marc:

w citzen "There is NO mandate to buy health insurance. Unless some piece of legislation passed both houses and was signed to by the president that I don't know about."

So, you're assuming the current bill won't pass?

Silly you.

"You like many are going to tell me all about the terror of a bill that you have not read and has not passed and will not be in the form that it is in not."

And you have read it? Ok, so prove I and many of us are wrong.

"Scare me again."

BOOOOOOO.

There that should do it, doesn't take much to get a pussy wet.

WC blaming us for commentin... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

WC blaming us for commenting on a bill we have not read when his leaders and reps in Congress are voting on the bill without reading it. Reid is hiding it. WC is fine with that. I pity duplicitous fools like WC. ww

"You like many are going... (Below threshold)
914:

"You like many are going to tell me all about the terror of a bill that you have not read and has not passed and will not be in the form that it is in not."

"will not be in the form that it is in not"

In other words, Your twisting Your own logic to admit that it is currently not in ( so it's justified ) but will be put back in just in time to be unread again and enacted upon all of us?

Yeah, make's sense....If Your an ASSCLOWN of World Citizens ilk.

"i>Conspiracies uncovered s... (Below threshold)
914:

"i>Conspiracies uncovered so far:

Global Black Helicopter Fleets √
FEMA Detention Camps √
Obama Hypnotizing Children During Back-to-School Address √
White House Christmas Ornament as Propaganda √
Death Panels √"

Yo' Adrian, You forgot one. One TROLL a blogging √


Sarah Palin's a Christian, ... (Below threshold)
Amazed:

Sarah Palin's a Christian, right? Then, why's she tweeting about celebrating the pagan holiday of the Winter Solstice? "AKs Winter Solstice=today begins season of lighter/brightr days."

Perhaps because it's not ju... (Below threshold)
Jeff Medcalf:

Perhaps because it's not just a Pagan holiday, but an astronomical fact? Indeed, the winter solstice begins the season of lighter/brighter days, no matter what your religion, just as the summer solstice begins the season of darker days and the equinoxes are times of balance between night and day. And as an Alaskan, that astronomical fact has serious and unavoidable consequences (the shifts in day length are extreme compared to the lower 48).

Adrian B. Wonder how you a... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Adrian B. Wonder how you are going to react. Groups of angry citizens are organizing as I write this. Seems lots of people are not willing to wait until the elections, which may or may not be able to change and fix the damage this Marxist and his commrades are doing to this country. If you want socialism AB, move to a place that has it. Leave the land of liberty to those of us who are responsible enough to live it.

Yes A Browne, pack up and t... (Below threshold)
914:

Yes A Browne, pack up and take Your Hollyweirdo's with You

The evils of of secular hum... (Below threshold)
Flu-Bird:

The evils of of secular humanism,scientology and liberalism

Are overtly represented her... (Below threshold)
914:

Are overtly represented here!




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy