You could dress up as a ‘death panelist’ for Obamacare this Halloween. But remember, like any good Halloween joke, just have a good laugh and move on because it isn’t real.
The rumor stems from a panel created by the reform law called the Independent Payment Advisory Board or IPAB for short. The panel’s 15 members are nominated by the President, in consultation with minority and majority Congressional leaders and confirmed by the Senate, much like Supreme Court justices or other high-ranking officials. The IPAB must be made up of doctors, employers, finance experts, and consumers. Federal and state bureaucrats don’t get a vote on the panel.
Starting in 2015, the panel is tasked with finding ways to slow the growth in Medicare costs without cutting benefits or raising costs on seniors. If Medicare costs grow faster than set targets then the IPAB makes suggestions to bring efficiency to the program, like reforming payment models to promote better quality care.
The panel only produces recommendations for savings in Medicare if costs exceed target growth rates. However, the law sets specific boundaries for the IPAB, as the non-partisan experts at the Kaiser Family Foundation explain:
The Board is prohibited from submitting proposals that would ration care, increase taxes, change Medicare benefits or eligibility, increase beneficiary premiums and cost-sharing requirements, or reduce low-income subsidies under Part D.
The IPAB can make recommendations for reducing payments to doctors and hospitals but as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities states, this is unlikely in the near term at least:
Both CBO and the Administration project that the [health reform law’s] explicit reductions in Medicare payment rates [for providers] will produce most or all of the savings needed to meet the law’s spending targets and that IPAB recommendations will not be needed in the next few years.
Any way you cut it, this is a far cry from a death panel where seniors over a certain age are denied care, or benefits are cut. And first and foremost, Congress is in the driver’s seat. The IPAB is simply a backstop to find much needed savings in Medicare through payment innovations or provider rate changes to help keep Medicare solvent if Congress fails to act. And even then, Congress can stop the IPAB recommendations from going into effect by doing its job and voting for changes they would rather see.
So what’s all the fuss? Put simply, opponents of the health reform law have purposefully mischaracterized the IPAB as a “death panel” in an effort to sway public opinion against the law. But seniors spending their time worrying about forthcoming mythical death panels may miss out on new benefits in Medicare like lower beneficiary spending in the dreaded “donut hole” or new, free preventive care visits to help you stay healthy.
We can’t stop the persistent email rumors and the well-funded misinformation campaigns, but we can help you sort out myth from fact. Consumer Reports read the law so you don’t have to and laid out how the law could affect you now and when it’s fully implemented in 2014 in our new guide to health reform.
Check out the new guide and forward it to the next person who sends you a nasty email rumor about “Obamacare.”
A new direction for healthcare...







So the camel is only allowed to put his nose into the tent–now. What will the panel be empowered to do when the money runs out and doctors/hospitals won’t take on new patients? At some point, decisions WILL be made about the value of procedures as measured by social return; that is, will the cost warrant the return on investment?
The current situation rations care based on the patient’s ability to pay, and insurance company bureaucrats decide what is covered and how much providers are reimbursed. Those are the true death panels–and that is what the new laws are changing.
How can anyone expect a corporation whose only goal is to maximize profit to make more humane decisions than elected and bipartisan representatives? The current environment is why millions of people every year breathe a sigh of relief because they are finally eligible for Medicare. Privatizing Medicare, as conservatives propose, means leaving those millions who hit 65 in the future without that protection, and repealing ObamaCare would leave those not old enough for Medicare still walking a precipice between bankruptcy and death.
If anyone has a motivation to slash benefits–but not premiums–it is the insurance companies that have all the power now. And yet you trust them to place your care above their profits. How irrational is that?
Fire Obama
Chas and Bill are clearly some right-wing trolls. They offer no intellectual, fact-based discussion. They immediately resort to fear-mongering and insults. They don’t want the “death panel” image to be proven as a lurid distortion. Then they would have to come up with credible information to use in this debate.
But, as a life-long Republican who hasn’t surrendered the ability for independent thought to Grover Norquist, I prefer to look at this just like fracking and deregulating business. Hey, what could possibly go wrong?
Those ‘panels’ which CU claims are not “death panels” decide whether or not treatment is provided, not whether or not they will be paid for by others. That sure sounds like the definition of a “death panel” to me.
AMEN & AMEN !!!!
THANK YOU!!
A very superficial explanation of the IPBA. It is possible that it is the start of “the slippery slope” toward the complete control of health care in this country which will require rationing as in England. Rationing can take many forms: Decreased payment to providers so they won’t see the patients, Decreased availability of services so the wait times are longer for say a MRI or a PET scan, Adoption of “best practices” medical care in which the panel decides that certain algorithms of care are no longer paid for because they don’t meet government approval (cookbook medicine). My other objection to “Obamacare” is the hidden taxes on house sales and stock or security transactions. Where does this money go and who has control of it? Also can Obama or any President make “recess appointment” to the IPBA that then don’t have to be approved by congress. There are many aspects of Obamacare in The thing to do is pick out the best parts and eliminate the bad parts in a thoughtful manner and not pass a bill that nobody got to read. So please when you discuss Obamacare or the IPBA don’t give people the impression it is a simple law that. It is enormously complex and far reaching.
The two preceding posters probably wouldn’t recognize objective truth if it rose up and bit them on the nose. The whole “death panel” thing has been a conscious creation of the nutjob right (hello, Sarah P.; recognize yourself?) It was baloney, it is baloney, and thus shall it remain. It’s about time the US joined the entire rest of the Industrialized West in assuring that its citizens do not have to choose between death and bankruptcy.
Yeah, cause it’s working out sooooo well for Great Britian.
You’re beginning to sound more like AARP than Consumer Reports. Death panels are real! What do you think will happen if the IPAB reduces payments to Doctors or Hospitals? Come on, this health care blitz was put together by Democratic staffers that had an agenda. Even Obama doesn’t know what’s in the bill. Your summery does not do justice to the actual law. There are nuances and taxes, that aren’t called taxes hidden on most pages of this monstrosity. Besides poor care, there is no consensus of what this will cost the American taxpayers! No one knows where the money for this is really going to come from as there has been no budget submitted and approved in FOUR years! Keeping your present HealthCare as promised by the doctor-in-chief is a myth!
Maybe a decent National Health Care Law is a good thing, but having this crap shoved down our throats by the skinny jerk in the White House is just plain wrong-whether it was Constitutional or not.
A real HealthCare Law needs bipartisan support and input from Doctors, Hospitals and Patients and will take maybe years to approve and pass something people can agree with if thats what the people want! And, not a bunch of guys in white coats saying oh this is great, like Obama put together in a week!
Um… where were you for all of 2009? Their was a year long debate in congress and the press. So not just Obama. And not just a week.
As for bipartisan support, the law contains many things originally proposed by Republicans. It was only after Republicans adopted on inauguration day their “say no to Obama no matter what it is, the country be damned, just make sure Obama fails” strategy that Republicans suddenly didn’t support the things they had previously proposed. And the fact that the law contains Republican suggested content is a provable fact. Not just rhetoric. I know that facts that do not support the Republican cause are ignored or called conspiracies by the right wing bloggers and talking heads. But I’m sorry to inform you that a fact is a fact.
But you are correct that death panels are real… but most people call them “Insurance Company Claims Departments.” Just ask someone who’s lost a loved one because the insurance company felt treating them would cut into their multimillion dollar profits too much. Or because they said that teenage acne from 25 years ago not disclosed on a health insurance enrollment form of a 40 year old constitutes nondisclosure of a preexisting condition and therefore that person’s breast cancer will not be covered. Just let her die. Who cares. Dad can take care of the kids. The CEO needs his 50 million dollar bonus. And these are documented and provable facts, not fear mongering such as the “death panel” claim of the right.
The republicans had 8 years under Bush 43 and 12 years under Reagan and Bush 41. Never happened then. And um, the current law can be amended and improved as needed. All major forms of legislation (Social Security, Medicare, and others) take that path. Heck, even the founding fathers, given God like status among right wingers, failed the first time around with the Articles of Confederation. But they tried something, and then improved upon it. They didn’t debate and do nothing for 64 years like we have on health care reform. (President Harry S. Truman first proposed health care reform in 1945 and every sitting president since then has at least commented on its need, and several tried to enact such. And President Theodore Roosevelt also proposed national health insurance of sorts in 1912.)
Of course the term “death panels” will not be blatantly used. But when you’re president tells an elderly citizen who needs a medical procedure to just “take an aspirin” & deal w/it, I’d say we are on the road to death panels. Many of our elected officials never even read the the thing & have no idea what’s behind the overall scheme of things. Obama continues to put power in administration appointees (Czars) & others who can decide, determine, change, insert & dictate at their whim.
Yes, I realized too late that I did not use the correct word…it should have been “your”.
Wow. I had not heard that President Obama told someone that. Can you please provide the date, time and location where he said that. Who was the elderly citizen he said that too? A link to the transcript or video of his saying that would me helpful. I assume you have such. I really want to see that. After all, it’s almost as bad as when Republicans passed state laws mandating that a woman be raped by her doctor (by having a foreign object inserted into her against her will) prior to having a medical procedure. Yet one more form of, as you so elegantly state, lawmakers who “decide, determine, change, insert & dictate at their whim.”
I was incorrect…it was not an aspirin but a pain pill. I’m sure he wouldn’t say this if this was his mom or grandmother. But then, again, who knows. I wouldn’t put anything past a man who would be in favor of letting babies who survived abortion to not be given life saving procedures. I’m sure when it comes time for him or his kids to have a procedure & the gov’t panels in charge, “Nope, sorry. Just take your pain pills”, he will feel a lot differently. I would not consider a medical procedure a “rape”. I had this procedure when I miscarried & the furthest thing from my mind was a rape. I see the fact that it is not required to notify parents concerning their underage daughter’s abortions but yet they have to sign approval for body piercings, tooth extractions & for them to take Tylenol a bit more of problem than a doctor having access to more info on a human that is about to murdered. Oh I get it. The abortionist & the woman do not want to actually acknowledge that it is in fact a human that they are about to murder.
So out of a 47 second comment about a family, a patient, and doctor’s looking at options — whether surgery or a pain killer is the better option for end of life care — all you hear is the phrase “taking the pain killer” and from that jump to the false statement of “Obama said to take a pain pill and deal with it”. Talk about selective listening and taking things out context. Let’s look at all 47 seconds of the answer in its entirety. First, he never utters the words “deal with it”. Second, he never says the woman should take the pill. In fact, he doesn’t use the would pill at all. Nor does he say that HE (or the government) would tell the women to just take the pain killer. He explicitly says: “that at least we can let doctors know, and we can let your mom know, that maybe this [the surgery] isn’t going to help. Maybe you are better off not having the surgery, but taking the pain killer”. Notice the two “maybes” in that statement. That means non-definitively. Not definitely. Conceivably; perhaps; mayhap; perchance; possibly. It indicates discussion and deliberation. Not absolutism. That is further reinforced by the the “at least” statement. And then when you take that in full context of his comments, which start with the statement “We are not going to solve every difficult problems in terms of end of life care. A lot of that is going to have to be we as a culture, and as a society, starting to make better decisions within our own families and for ourselves.” So when taking in full context, it is very clear he was saying the patient and the family need making the decision of whether or not to take the pain killer. Not for the government to tell her to. In fact, no where in his answer does he use the word government.
As for the rape… technically/legally it is called “Object sexual penetration”. But most people would still use the vernacular “rape” to describe it. But so as not to appear incorrect, I will use the legal term from hear on out. Specifically, it is Virgina State Law § 18.2-67.2. Object sexual penetration.
The thing that I find so hypocritical, is that you are saying that it is OK for the government to in practice and actuality to tell a person what they should do in terms of a medical procedure when you agree with it. (I’m sorry to inform you that an abortion is a medical procedure and is sometimes medically necessary.) But when there is a just a unfounded fear of the government telling people what to do, even though it has not happened in actual practice, that that is not OK because you disagree with it.
Moreover, what I find frustrating is the chain of events the conservatives propose:
1) We can’t teach sex ed in schools despite the proof it reduces teenage sexual activity and reduces unwanted pregnancy in both teens and adults
2) We can’t hand out free condoms despite the fact that studies have shown that it does NOT increase sexual activity but does reduce unwanted pregnancies (and the transmission of STDs)
3) We can’t fund programs (planned parenthood, afterschool activities) that have been shown to reduce pregnancies in teens and young adults
So far the message is, government stay out, let’s ignore the problem and pretend it doesn’t happen. But when the problem does happen…
4) It is OK for the government to mandate Object sexual penetration or to mandate the baby be carried to term.
5) Once the baby is born, we do not allow any assistance to the mother or the child via government assistance programs because conservatives think that is welfare, which is bad. The person that the government would not help educate, would not help prevent the pregnancy, and forced to carry to term, that same government in the conservatives ideal world now say “you are on your own.” The child’s well being be damned. We only cared during the pregnancy. Not before. Not after. So what if studies show that unwanted children often grow up to have mental health problems because of the environment.
Personally I would prefer that abortions be limited to only situations where the mother’s health is at stake. (And to me that includes rape and incest since the mother’s mental health is at stake.) I would love it if we lived in a world where unwanted pregnancies did not occur. But they do. And personally I think a child is better off being aborted than to have to live a life of being unwanted. Making a child feel unwanted is one of the greatest and cruelest forms of child abuse. I’m sure you disagree with that. But that’s your choice. And choice is what the debate is about. If you, God forbid, are ever raped and get pregnant, it is your choice to carry that baby to term. ANd until you are in that position, it is impossible to know what that is like. I have seen women speak who were advent pro-lifers, until they got raped. And then had to face the decision of living, for the rest of their lives, with a face that would forever remind them of the most horrific and tragic event in their life. For 99.9% of women who get an abortion, it is the hardest choice to make. Whether that decision is due to rape, due financial circumstances, or due to their health issue. They do not relish it like a day at the hair dressers. But they need to be able to have that choice available to them.
Consumer Reports recently wrote about infections that are aquired in hospital, and that Medicare’s response a few years ago was to stop payments for these infections, hoping, unsuccessfully, to cause hospitals to improve care and reduce these infections. This is one example of reduction of coverage and payments where the patients lose out and lose care…and yet the activist arm of CR would have you believe Medicare won’t cut reimbursements and hurt patients??? They want to cut Medicare reimbursements further? If you have ever seen a Medicare recipient’s statements from Medicare they already pay a pittance of what is billed.
Don’t miss the FACT that the law removes $716 Billion in reimbursement to providers, both hospitals and doctors, over the next 10 years and that many physicians, in surveys, have said they will retire or will stop accepting new Medicare patients because the lower (or not increasing for inflation) reimbursement will not cover their costs.
The IPAB will have no choice but to make recommendations that allow them to cut costs based on available funds. THAT is a fact.
Also, the DHHS and the DOJ recently warned providers that they are being watched for fraud because they are now coding for higher reimbursement with their new MANDATED Electronic Medical Record (EMR) systems, “but with no improved quality of care”. The cost of the program WILL go (is already going) up.
WELL, that shows that Sebilius and Holder DON’T HAVE A CLUE ABOUT HEALTH CARE. Providers have under-coded forever because they didn’t feel they had sufficient written documentation to defend themselves in the event of a Medicare or Medicaid audit. Now their EMR provides, and confirms, the accurate diagnosis and coding, so they can confidently get reimbursed for the level of care they were ALREADY providing.
Obamacare DOES NOT fix the problem. It exacerbates it!!!
When companies negotiate with insurance companies on behalf of their employees, they determine what services are covered based on what the competing companies offer at the price they can pay. So saying that the insurance company is in total control and doesn’t care at all about the patients in ludicrous.
Don’t forget that Medicare is on a path to bankruptcy, so it won’t MATTER if your covered if money isn’t available to pay for the care. Then what will the IPAB recommend???
I think that Obama care is a step in the right direction regarding healthcare providers. However, it is a far cry from what our government should provide to its citizens. As long as we think it is just fine to pay profit-driven companies to provide healthcare we will remain on the losing end. What we really need are non-profit healthcare providers that don’t pay executives multi-million dollar salaries, so they can make generous contributions to their political comrades in Congress.
Now here we go again picking the lesser of two evils for President. One that made improvements in healthcare, without upsetting too many insurance company campaign contributors, and another that wants a healthcare system based on a rationing scheme that generates even more insurance company profits.
I always wonder why our “national defense” focuses so much on war and putting our brave soldiers, along with government well-paid mercenaries, in harm’s way – when tens of thousands of American citizens die every year right here from infections in poorly regulated hospitals. I don’t recall any of the lame-brained moderators of the “debates” bringing up this shameful and embarrassing topic for perspective…
will SUDDUTH,
What you just described has been going on for years already with the current system of private insurance companies we’re using and have been using forever. How many times have you needed a medical procedure, but the private insurance company denied it; death panel. Some doctors won’t let you make an appointment without contacting your insurance to see if they will pay for it; death panel. Cancer patients die without receiving full treatment because their insurance said no to paying for further treatment ; death panel. Hospitals discriminate against the elderly everyday. If you have cancer and are 72 years old, doctors decide together if they want to spend time and money to heal you because you’be been on this planet long enough as far as they’re concerned.
We simply can not have unlimited health care without unlimited funds. Insurance companies or the federal government will limit access unless we have unlimited funds to pay for it. Also if it works so well to have a single payer how about we all have a single payer for housing, food, transportation, etc. It seems so much more fair. Oh, that has been tried too, USSR.
Death panels and many of the other outright goofy claims coming from those who want to discredit the President with false or misleading information raise one extremely important question.
Do you want to be governed by those use these strategies for political gain? If they are so comfortable promoting the big lie rather than argue a position in its merits, will you be comfortable with them as your leaders?
I am not comfortable with Obama as a leader, as all he has done is LIED. Starting with before he was elected…he claimed that he would be the most transparent President in history, yet everything he has done has been behind closed doors. He has yet to release his college applications and transcripts (I know it’s not mandatory, but why spend millions keeping them secret?). He stated that bills before Congress would be posted on the internet for, I’m not sure, maybe 2-5 days so that We the People could see the content. And what about the big Benghazi lie? Emails show that people in his administration KNEW what was going on in real time, yet he does nothing. Then, after the fact, he has the nerve to lie about the nature of the attack. Now, in my humble opinion, EVERYTHING he has done over the last 4 years has only been for his political gain. Using your logic, then, means I cannot vote for Obama!
Lots of good points to be considered, positive and negative. I have many questions, but one that keeps recuring is why congress exempted itself from the law. If it is such a good plan then everyone should be a part of it. To exempt yourself only raises negative thoughts.
This story is a bunch of hooey. Based on you, the IPAB does basically nothing with a very minor proviso that they can recommend cuts to the payments for medical professionals. Now what could they cut? Drastic cuts to doctors and other medical providers will see those people will drop out of the Medicare program reducing Seniors choice. So the only cuts that can make are the maximum age for for various procedures like bypass surgery etc. It is clear that is the only way this board can go.
You state, “Congress is in the driver’s seat.” Nonsense, we have just witnessed a President who has ignored Congress and put in place policies specifically against the wishes of Congress.
To curtail costs there is really only one policy, and that policy has never even been mentioned, so there currently there is no way to cut almost a trillion dollars out of Medicare without reducing services to Seniors.
This Death Panel idea is very interesting. I can still remember the Socialized Medicine scare when Medicare was first proposed. Physicians and politicians by the hundreds were screaming at the top of their lungs that if we have Medicare, we will only be able to be treated by physicians who are chosen by the government, we will have to wait months, even years for an appointment with a specialist, we will not have any say in our own health care. The truth is that those who are fortunate enough to have reached the Age of Medicare or have Medicaid can go to any physician in the USA, go to any hospital in the USA, receive health care even at those Doc in the Box offices in shopping malls and have 80% of the bill paid by Medicare or 100% of the bill paid by Medicaid. The only trouble with Medicare was in the beginning when greedy doctors saw a good chance of increasing their income by charging exorbitant fees for things like “dressings”, a Band aid, or an antihistamine shot which cost the doctor around fifty cents and cost Medicare around $500. Once the government got the medical greed problem under control, Medicare has worked fine all these years. The real Death Panels are the new breed of Republicans who would take you and your kids and toss the whole lot into an early grave so there would be more money to pay for useless wars, and more industries to destroy our environment.
If Medicare is working so well, then tell me why it is going bankrupt?
Isn’t it interesting that CR, who has promoted a reputation for being objective, only presents the positive side of the “Affordable” care act, which, by the way, has already resulted in increased premiums and employers seeking ways to avoid participating.
Check out the profile of the President and CEO http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/about-us/leadership/leadership-profiles/index.htm
It mentions his work with Ted Kennedy, handgun control, planned parenthood, etc.
We are to believe Congress will really be in charge, but most of them admitted to not reading the bill, and as Jim said, why did Congress exempt themselves? …And how much that is passed by the House is never allowed to be brought to a vote in the Senate…But as Bette pointed out, care is already limited to seniors. A family member was in her 90′s and living independently, driving, alert and engaging. When she developed a treatable heart problem her physician would not treat it and asked what we expected at her age. But, the fact that this already occurs does not mean we should accept it in our health care. Fixing health care should be about IMPROVING it. Some states have implemented caps on malpractice awards due to frivolous suits, instead of just dealing effectively with the frivolous suits. As long as ER’s are used as walk-in clinics, it will be hard to control escalating costs. I read the bill…it is much more focused on providing the Secretary of Health and Human Services far-reaching control over health care than it is in solving the issues that have created skyrocketing costs.
Many people wonder why Republican legislators AND OTHERS are so unrelenting on President Obama. Why there are so many attacks against Obama and anything he says or touches. Why there is so much hate and fabrication…? Frederick Douglass gave us the answer many years ago. How Prophetic !
“Though the colored man is no longer subject to barter and sale, he is surrounded by an adverse settlement which fetters all his movements. In his downward course he meets with no resistance, but his course upward is resented and resisted at every step of his progress. If he comes in ignorance, rags and wretchedness he conforms to the popular belief of his character, and in that character he is welcome; but if he shall come as a gentleman, a scholar and a statesman, he is hailed as a contradiction to the national faith concerning his race, and his coming is resented as impudence. In one case he may provoke contempt and derision, but in the other he is an affront to pride and provokes malice.”
Frederick Douglass
September 23, 1883
These words ring true 129 years later
So, because we don’t like his policies, we are AUTOMATICALLY racists. You are nothing more than a race-baiting moron!
After reflecting on BC’s rather informed comments, I have to wonder again, why CR is even involved in this mess. I’d like to have them stick with what they do best, objective (I hope) product reviews. Yes this does involve consumers, but whitewashing Obamacare is not helpful. Perhaps there are some good parts to the bill and maybe some suggestions from the Republicans are mirrored in the final product, but telling our legislators they can read it after the vote is no way to run a railroad. I can tell you from personal experience that one of my doctors has stopped taking any more medicare patients. I read in the paper where employers like Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Longhorn will be cutting hours so there are few full time employees because of the requirements of Obamacare. Our economy is in the toilet and this product is going to provide the flush.
your initial comments about de facto rationing describe the current state, except that you left out denial of health care due to preexisting conditions. Later I realized that you were either unaware of the current state or chose to ignore it. Since you sound fairly articulate I have to assume that you left out pre-existing condition discussion on purpose. Oh and Obamacare was never a secret passed in the middle of the night.
The US needs to join with EVERY other developed and many undeveloped nation and provide medical care to all. We don’t need to play the illusion game of insurance company competition. Blue Cross Blue Shield varies between 75 and 100% of a state’s healthcare insurance.
As for in recess appointments, I am sure that you are aware that President Obama has had the fewest in session appointments by the do nothing Republicans. They have even turned down department heads that they agreed with out of obstructionist “principle.” Can you imagine a democratically elected president without one budget approved in 4 years.
I disagree with dressing up as a Death Panelist. Americans are too dumb to grasp that it’s a joke
Okay, this is mostly taken from MA health reform, which was Romney’s baby. He stated at the time it was the greatest healthcare plan and should be used as a model for the country, so what happened? He changed his tune really quick, but he is good at that. There are no death panels except for what we have now, businessmen decideing what the right treatment or test is for you not your dr. So what do we have to lose to try to change, yea it needs work, we will keep refining it, like we do everything, we have to start somewhere. Getting rid of medicare or medicaid or privatising it won’t work, neither will voutures, will end up paying more and people wil contuine to die. What we have now the rich can get treatment, tests whatever, the middleclass and poor can’t. That’s playing God, that’s what insurences are doing, poor can’t pay so they shouldn’t live. Well, basically that’s what Romney said when he said ” I don’t care about the 47%”. Well, I don’t pretend to be God, I don’t think anyone should, I do know that Mormans do believe you can became a God, I have a friend who is a Morman, so I have no problem with them. My thinking is that I a not God nor do I feel anyone can be God, so it is not their place to decide who lives or dies. Just my opinion. Obama care is a starting place to make a real difference in health care in this country. We rank lower in health care then some third world countries, and we are suppose to be the best country in the world. So we all have to look into our hearts and minds to see what we believe is right. Follow that and you will be able to live with any decision you make, just make an informed decision,not one based on fear or party line or rasism.
Not easy to believe sharon or CU – can’t prove there is no death squad until AFTER the Obamacare is enabled. Then, like he has done so many times against the constitution and laws of the country, Obama will find a way to appoint a death squad czar. It’s deny all what Obama may do when you are blinded by his liberal, leftist stance. Only way to be sure is to vote him out. Let Romney take over, we can trust him, regardless of any negative replies to this.
It’s a shame those replying can’t stick with the topic of health care and have to make all the issues partisan. The whitewashing of this law encourages that, however.
Our health care is far from perfect, although many from other countries come here for treatment who live in the third world sharon refers to (which countries are those?) and other more advanced countries.
Seems as if most programs run and controlled by the government are on the verge of backruptcy…not a great legacy for this program. As I mentioned before, there are many serious issues with our healthcare system that are not addressed, and there are also many addressed that are nothing more than “social justice” efforts. Adding millions to the health insurance rolls by it’s nature means less care to go around. When problems become political issues, it seems to be impossible to arrive at reasonable, proactive answers.
I don’t think it is the capabilities of our system that is of concern. It’s the out of control cost of it. We pay more per capita for our health care than any other county, yet rank near the bottom in life expectancy and infant mortality. So it’s the cost that needs to be addressed.
I am confused by your reply. It would seem as if the rankings you mention in terms of life expectancy & mortality would be directly related to capabilities…However, a recent article in Forbes disputes the rankings: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/11/23/the-myth-of-americans-poor-life-expectancy/
and his points make sense.
There is no question that costs need to be addressed. However, only looking at costs without considering outcomes does not = good quality of care. Obamacare was promoted to provide cost savings…and even that has been shown to be inaccurate. It was promoted to be universal…but millions were granted exemptions.
Sadly, Consumer Reports has the expertise to review health care delivery and propose changes that would result in lowered costs and improved service and outcomes, as they did with a simple, easy to implement system to reduce or eliminate central line infections in hospitals. Unfortunately, they have chosen instead to, as Jim said, whitewash Obamacare.
Explain, then, why Obama’s latest budget was refused by ALL members of Congress? The Democrats had chance after chance to put a budget in place, they had the majority for the last 2 years of Bush’s presidency and the first 2 years of Obama’s. Why did do nothing???
Mark says, “. . .personally I think a child is better off being aborted than to have to live a life of being unwanted.”
I say “Dear God, spare us from thinking like yours!”
Good day! Do you know if they make any plugins to assist with SEO? I’m trying to get my blog to rank for some targeted keywords but I’m not seeing very good success. If you know of any please share. Kudos!
Uncovered your post titled: Dress up as a death panelist for Halloween | Your Health Security through a Zynga posting……I’m thrilled I stopped in as you have got some good top quality information on this specific website.