- therock18
- 08-09-2013, 10:39 PM
- Chica Chaser
- 08-09-2013, 11:04 PM
Death Panels? Oh no...that is not part of Obamacare. Sarah Palin was mercilessly ridiculed for even suggesting so.
- therock18
- 08-09-2013, 11:29 PM
Read the article, then read Obamacare and if you did read you would KNOW that Death Panels ARE part of Obamacare!
- JD Barleycorn
- 08-10-2013, 01:03 AM
Howard Dean, former head of the DNC and a doctor to boot, also agrees that the Independent Payment Advisory Board will ration health care as Sarah Palin predicted. The death panels are real and Howard Dean agrees.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...498014414.html
Experience tells me the Independent Payment Advisory Board will fail.
Clearly, the foremost achievement of President Obama's first term is the Affordable Care Act, and when fully implemented the law will move America closer to universal health coverage—something many progressives have sought for years. Like it or not, the law—at least its foundation—is here to stay, and lawmakers ought to focus over the next year on ensuring a relatively smooth implementation.
Although I've been critical of many components of the law, there is still much to applaud. Accountable Care Organizations could eliminate duplicative services and prevent medical errors while seeking to reduce costs for individuals, particularly if their creation ultimately leads to the end of fee-for-service medicine, as I believe it will. In addition, the Health Insurance Marketplace exchange systems, once implemented, will provide individuals with competitive plan options based on price, services, quality and other factors. Even more important, the exchanges will make the process of securing health insurance much easier and more transparent for millions who don't currently have it.
The administration's decision to delay implementation of the employer mandate until 2015 will help funnel individuals and families who do not get insurance through their employer into the exchanges. While this may benefit the participating insurers in the short term, this also accelerates the trend toward divorcing health care from employment. This is not a radical idea, and was even proposed by Sen. John McCain in his 2008 presidential campaign. That development will lead to the end of job lock for workers and contribute to a more competitive American business community in the longer run.
That said, the law still has its flaws, and American lawmakers and citizens have both an opportunity and responsibility to fix them.
One major problem is the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.
There does have to be control of costs in our health-care system. However, rate setting—the essential mechanism of the IPAB—has a 40-year track record of failure. What ends up happening in these schemes (which many states including my home state of Vermont have implemented with virtually no long-term effect on costs) is that patients and physicians get aggravated because bureaucrats in either the private or public sector are making medical decisions without knowing the patients. Most important, once again, these kinds of schemes do not control costs. The medical system simply becomes more bureaucratic.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has indicated that the IPAB, in its current form, won't save a single dime before 2021. As everyone in Washington knows, but less frequently admits, CBO projections of any kind—past five years or so—are really just speculation. I believe the IPAB will never control costs based on the long record of previous attempts in many of the states, including my own state of Vermont.
If Medicare is to have a secure future, we have to move away from fee-for-service medicine, which is all about incentives to spend more, and has no incentives in the system to keep patients healthy. The IPAB has no possibility of helping to solve this major problem and will almost certainly make the system more bureaucratic and therefore drive up administrative costs.
To date, 22 Democrats have joined Republicans in the House and Senate in support of legislation to do away with the IPAB. Yet because of the extraordinary partisanship on Capitol Hill and Republican threats to defund the law through the appropriations process, it is unlikely that any change in the Affordable Care Act will take place soon.
The IPAB will cause frustration to providers and patients alike, and it will fail to control costs. When, and if, the atmosphere on Capitol Hill improves and leadership becomes interested again in addressing real problems instead of posturing, getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.
Mr. Dean, governor of Vermont from 1991 to 2002 and a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is a strategic adviser to McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...498014414.html
Experience tells me the Independent Payment Advisory Board will fail.
- By
- HOWARD DEAN
Clearly, the foremost achievement of President Obama's first term is the Affordable Care Act, and when fully implemented the law will move America closer to universal health coverage—something many progressives have sought for years. Like it or not, the law—at least its foundation—is here to stay, and lawmakers ought to focus over the next year on ensuring a relatively smooth implementation.
Although I've been critical of many components of the law, there is still much to applaud. Accountable Care Organizations could eliminate duplicative services and prevent medical errors while seeking to reduce costs for individuals, particularly if their creation ultimately leads to the end of fee-for-service medicine, as I believe it will. In addition, the Health Insurance Marketplace exchange systems, once implemented, will provide individuals with competitive plan options based on price, services, quality and other factors. Even more important, the exchanges will make the process of securing health insurance much easier and more transparent for millions who don't currently have it.
The administration's decision to delay implementation of the employer mandate until 2015 will help funnel individuals and families who do not get insurance through their employer into the exchanges. While this may benefit the participating insurers in the short term, this also accelerates the trend toward divorcing health care from employment. This is not a radical idea, and was even proposed by Sen. John McCain in his 2008 presidential campaign. That development will lead to the end of job lock for workers and contribute to a more competitive American business community in the longer run.
That said, the law still has its flaws, and American lawmakers and citizens have both an opportunity and responsibility to fix them.
One major problem is the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.
There does have to be control of costs in our health-care system. However, rate setting—the essential mechanism of the IPAB—has a 40-year track record of failure. What ends up happening in these schemes (which many states including my home state of Vermont have implemented with virtually no long-term effect on costs) is that patients and physicians get aggravated because bureaucrats in either the private or public sector are making medical decisions without knowing the patients. Most important, once again, these kinds of schemes do not control costs. The medical system simply becomes more bureaucratic.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has indicated that the IPAB, in its current form, won't save a single dime before 2021. As everyone in Washington knows, but less frequently admits, CBO projections of any kind—past five years or so—are really just speculation. I believe the IPAB will never control costs based on the long record of previous attempts in many of the states, including my own state of Vermont.
If Medicare is to have a secure future, we have to move away from fee-for-service medicine, which is all about incentives to spend more, and has no incentives in the system to keep patients healthy. The IPAB has no possibility of helping to solve this major problem and will almost certainly make the system more bureaucratic and therefore drive up administrative costs.
To date, 22 Democrats have joined Republicans in the House and Senate in support of legislation to do away with the IPAB. Yet because of the extraordinary partisanship on Capitol Hill and Republican threats to defund the law through the appropriations process, it is unlikely that any change in the Affordable Care Act will take place soon.
The IPAB will cause frustration to providers and patients alike, and it will fail to control costs. When, and if, the atmosphere on Capitol Hill improves and leadership becomes interested again in addressing real problems instead of posturing, getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.
Mr. Dean, governor of Vermont from 1991 to 2002 and a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is a strategic adviser to McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP.
- LexusLover
- 08-10-2013, 05:19 AM
I like this quote:
"To date, 22 Democrats have joined Republicans in the House and Senate in support of legislation to do away with the IPAB. Yet because of the extraordinary partisanship on Capitol Hill and Republican threats to defund the law through the appropriations process, it is unlikely that any change in the Affordable Care Act will take place soon."
For those of you with reading comprehension problems, or Obaminable blinders and earplugs, what this says is ... "we" Democrats crammed this Bill down the taxpayers' throats without knowing what is in it and now that we have found out what is in it and want to change it because Palin was correct about what she said, it's the Republicans' fault for not forcing us to get rid of the Death Panels, and therefor the Republicans are not saving us from our own stupidity and ignorance. Again.
Where are Nancy, Harry, and Obaminable when accountability is assessed.
"To date, 22 Democrats have joined Republicans in the House and Senate in support of legislation to do away with the IPAB. Yet because of the extraordinary partisanship on Capitol Hill and Republican threats to defund the law through the appropriations process, it is unlikely that any change in the Affordable Care Act will take place soon."
For those of you with reading comprehension problems, or Obaminable blinders and earplugs, what this says is ... "we" Democrats crammed this Bill down the taxpayers' throats without knowing what is in it and now that we have found out what is in it and want to change it because Palin was correct about what she said, it's the Republicans' fault for not forcing us to get rid of the Death Panels, and therefor the Republicans are not saving us from our own stupidity and ignorance. Again.
Where are Nancy, Harry, and Obaminable when accountability is assessed.
- pyramider
- 08-10-2013, 05:39 AM
I have applied for a panel position.
- LexusLover
- 08-10-2013, 05:53 AM
- WTF
- 08-10-2013, 08:40 AM
You numbnuts call end of life care Death Panels!
I have never understood you Tea Poopers logic, you want to cut spending and when a logical step is taken towards the fastest growing expenditure in government , you mislabel it as Death Panels for political purpose.
Which one of you want to pay more in taxes for the soon to die extended life care? You guys love to run up debt and then bitch about it, kinda like the Iraq War, cut taxes and then start an expensive war. What kind of logic is that? Pray do tell. Maybe JD can ask his mystery Priest!
I have never understood you Tea Poopers logic, you want to cut spending and when a logical step is taken towards the fastest growing expenditure in government , you mislabel it as Death Panels for political purpose.
Which one of you want to pay more in taxes for the soon to die extended life care? You guys love to run up debt and then bitch about it, kinda like the Iraq War, cut taxes and then start an expensive war. What kind of logic is that? Pray do tell. Maybe JD can ask his mystery Priest!
- CJ7
- 08-10-2013, 08:56 AM
You numbnuts call end of life care Death Panels!
I have never understood you Tea Poopers logic, you want to cut spending and when a logical step is taken towards the fastest growing expenditure in government , you mislabel it as Death Panels for political purpose.
Which one of you want to pay more in taxes for the soon to die extended life care? You guys love to run up debt and then bitch about it, kinda like the Iraq War, cut taxes and then start an expensive war. What kind of logic is that? Pray do tell. Maybe JD can ask his mystery Priest! Originally Posted by WTF
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-death-panels/
- Jackie S
- 08-10-2013, 09:00 AM
The facts is, in our "modern" health care system, a person will spend more during he last few weeks of life than was spent in the years prior. Most of this involves extreme care, extraordinary measures, and people's refusal to believe that the time is up.
We all say that we do not wish to be "plugged in" with no hope of survival, and wasting away as medical cost sky rocket. But I really do not know what I would do in this situation.
We as a Country have to come to grips with the fact that life does end, and nobody gets out of life alive. Since I am getting pretty close to 67 years old, my time is soon coming when I might have to face the very situation.
The best death we can hope for is at about 90, after leading a good productive life, we just drop dead of a massive stroke or heart attack. No machines involved, no life and death decisions, it's over.
But the cold hard facts are our hospitals are full of people who are just saving funeral cost. They are not walking out. Their entire Familly savings will be exhausted for a few more weeks of "life". When they have no money, the rest of society must pick up the bill.
And has been noted, these final weeks of extraordinary "care" can not only bankrupt an individual, but our entire healthcare system.
What we need is a good dose of common sense. We have to come to grips with the fact that when life is no longer worth living, then it's over.
I would much rather see our health care resources be used to help and cure those who still have decades of quality life remaining than simply prolonging the last few weeks of terminal patients who are, in reality, beyond help.
We all say that we do not wish to be "plugged in" with no hope of survival, and wasting away as medical cost sky rocket. But I really do not know what I would do in this situation.
We as a Country have to come to grips with the fact that life does end, and nobody gets out of life alive. Since I am getting pretty close to 67 years old, my time is soon coming when I might have to face the very situation.
The best death we can hope for is at about 90, after leading a good productive life, we just drop dead of a massive stroke or heart attack. No machines involved, no life and death decisions, it's over.
But the cold hard facts are our hospitals are full of people who are just saving funeral cost. They are not walking out. Their entire Familly savings will be exhausted for a few more weeks of "life". When they have no money, the rest of society must pick up the bill.
And has been noted, these final weeks of extraordinary "care" can not only bankrupt an individual, but our entire healthcare system.
What we need is a good dose of common sense. We have to come to grips with the fact that when life is no longer worth living, then it's over.
I would much rather see our health care resources be used to help and cure those who still have decades of quality life remaining than simply prolonging the last few weeks of terminal patients who are, in reality, beyond help.
- CJ7
- 08-10-2013, 09:05 AM
I have left explicit orders to let me die. If it takes a machine to keep me alive, I'm already dead. Time to walk the path into the spirit world and join the ancestors.
- JD Barleycorn
- 08-10-2013, 10:16 AM
WTF just put his finger on it. He doesn't understand.
Healthcare is not the fastest growing expense of government or it wasn't until Obamacare showed up. It is a false argument. It was voluntary for government to get involved at all. Kind of like that voluntary war in Iraq. Plus, the Tea Party is not about cutting spending per se, it is about cutting unnecessary spending and eliminating waste (which reduces spending further). Another thing that WTF just doesn't understand is that GOP wants these to be in the hands of the private experts so of course they don't have a competing program to Obamacare. We beleive that government should not be in this business in the first place.
There were a number of things proposed by the GOP back in 2010 to reduce the cost of healthcare but they never it for a vote. Things like allowing you to buy your healthcare across state lines, making healthcare dollars tax deductible, giving each American heath savings accounts that were portable, tort reform to reduce crap malpractice lawsuits (the lottery), and more. Everyone of these things has been shown to reduce overall cost but they were never considered by the democratic majority. This should cast in doubt the claims made by Obama when he says that they want to reduce the cost. If that was true then they would have least voted on these measures. And I don't even want to get into the enforcement arm being ran by the IRS.
WTF just doesn't understand.......the rest of us do and everyday we are being proven right by the actions of this corrupt regime when they exclude themselves and their friends from participation.
One little thing; when you get "cadillac" healthcare benefits then you have to pay a fine for having too much healthcare available (from each according to his means to each according to his needs)
Healthcare is not the fastest growing expense of government or it wasn't until Obamacare showed up. It is a false argument. It was voluntary for government to get involved at all. Kind of like that voluntary war in Iraq. Plus, the Tea Party is not about cutting spending per se, it is about cutting unnecessary spending and eliminating waste (which reduces spending further). Another thing that WTF just doesn't understand is that GOP wants these to be in the hands of the private experts so of course they don't have a competing program to Obamacare. We beleive that government should not be in this business in the first place.
There were a number of things proposed by the GOP back in 2010 to reduce the cost of healthcare but they never it for a vote. Things like allowing you to buy your healthcare across state lines, making healthcare dollars tax deductible, giving each American heath savings accounts that were portable, tort reform to reduce crap malpractice lawsuits (the lottery), and more. Everyone of these things has been shown to reduce overall cost but they were never considered by the democratic majority. This should cast in doubt the claims made by Obama when he says that they want to reduce the cost. If that was true then they would have least voted on these measures. And I don't even want to get into the enforcement arm being ran by the IRS.
WTF just doesn't understand.......the rest of us do and everyday we are being proven right by the actions of this corrupt regime when they exclude themselves and their friends from participation.
One little thing; when you get "cadillac" healthcare benefits then you have to pay a fine for having too much healthcare available (from each according to his means to each according to his needs)
- LexusLover
- 08-10-2013, 10:56 AM
- i'va biggen
- 08-10-2013, 11:42 AM
WTF did you wingers think the drones were for??
- LexusLover
- 08-10-2013, 12:14 PM