Tuesday, November 26, 2013

"Mark Halperin: Obamacare Contains "Death Panels""

"It's built into the plan. It's not like a guess or like a judgment. That's going to be part of how costs are controlled," Halperin told "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV."

(Audio at the link)

I thought there was no death panel. (video at the jump)



44 comments:

Michael Haz said...

I missed the part where Halperin said "Yeah, Sarah Palin was right about there being death panels.. We should have been all over this back when she said it."

MSM people are just now looking into the details of ObamaCare because they now see scenarios under which they will be tossed onto ObamaCare. And *gasp* they don't like what they see.

Sad trombone.

Lem said...

"Yeah, Sarah Palin was right about there being death panels.. We should have been all over this back when she said it."

They wont say things like that (a definite my bad, Palin was right) in a way that could be played in a YouTube sound bite, because that's how the low information voters hear... and that would confuse them.

Lem said...

So they couch it in weaselgram.

Unknown said...

Democrats who loyally voted for the big lie now say it's a train wreck. Is there any room in the Tea party ovens for them?

AllenS said...

The MSM will simply pretend that they are breaking this news to everyone.

bagoh20 said...

You just gotta love the fact that everyone on all sides now knows that this law had to be lied about in its' entirety to be passed, and it still needed to be done at night with payoffs, and political maneuvering, and zero bipartisan support.

And even still lots of people are OK with that... in a democracy... based on the idea that it exists of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Have they no shame at all?

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

So Halperin says, The Affordable Care Act contains provisions ... to decide which critically-ill patients receive care and which won't.

Does anyone seriously believe that those same decisions aren't currently made on a daily basis. This is business as usual. Many critically ill patients are terminal, further treatment simply prolongs their pain and suffering.

Leland said...

Does anyone seriously believe

Not now, but plenty of guillible Obama voters believed it when he said they would get treated for their pre-existing conditions. They weren't told then that certain conditions would be deemed "terminal", so they would be denied treatment that simply prolongs their life.

Methadras said...

Why is this a shocking surprise. The people who didn't vote for Obama are getting fucked and the ones who did don't care.

bagoh20 said...

The point is the lies. How that back when the lies really mattered people would call you a racist, a nut, or a hyperbalist for just suggesting the lies were lies. It was despicable then, and it continues to be despicable now for supporters to suggest that people should have known they were being lied to and stopped them from screwing things up, but now it's too late, so shut up again. Anyway, it's for your own good.

bagoh20 said...

Look, if you want free birth control we have to break a few eggs.

test said...

Shocking ARM went from denying Obamacare includes Death Panels to saying of course it includes Death Panels. And it's quite interesting that each statement just happened to coincide with the left's political interests when made.

Purely coincidental I'm sure.

test said...

It's also a lie that Obamacare is budget neutral.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Does anyone seriously believe that those same decisions aren't currently made on a daily basis

Of course they are. They are now (or were) private and personal decisions. They are made by the patients, the family of the patients and the recommendations of the doctors.

The private and personal relationship between the patient and their insurance provider as well. The limits on your medical insurance also make some of those decisions as well. When people buy insurance they know what they are covered for, what limits are on the coverage (deductible, out of pocket annual and lifetime limits). They know what medicines are in the formula or that are allowed by the insurance company. This is all part of the contract between the insurance company and the client.

The difference NOW is that these decisions are being made by a panel of unelected GOVERNMENT officials who do not need to consult the family or the doctor. Those decisions are not based on the needs of the patient but rather on how much useful life they have left and a cost benefit analysis by the government as to whether it is "worth" giving medical care or withholding it until the patient dies.

This is the same rationale you use in deciding whether to junk your old car in lieu of a new one. The difference is that people are not machines or cogs in the machine and are not replaceable or interchangeable. In the government plan the cost benefit is slanted to letting an old person prematurely die or a younger disabled person wither and die: and instead putting those medical resources into the life of a younger person. The reason is purely economical in that the younger person will be able to work and PAY TAXES longer, produce for the State, and do so at a higher level than the inconvenient old geezer or the young kid with Downs.

Is this how we want to ethically ration health care. Based not on the person has to offer, based not on a lifetime of memories and experiences, based not on the value of that person as a living soul.....but based on their intrinsic dollar value to the government? Culling the herd is what we do to cattle and livestock. Not to humans.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Many critically ill patients are terminal, further treatment simply prolongs their pain and suffering.

My mother was in an auto accident many years ago, had a severe head injury and was in a coma. It was her second such injury in her lifetime and the second time she was comatose. We had insurance that would cover treatment.

As as family, we made the decision to "pull the plug". It wasn't an easy decision. We had to have much discussion with the doctors and amongst ourselves. However...WE....made that decision. Not some government flunky. No some petty bureaucrat who decided that it might be too expensive to treat my mother. WE made that choice of our own free will.

YOU no longer have that choice.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Marshal said...
Shocking ARM went from denying Obamacare includes Death Panels to saying of course it includes Death Panels. And it's quite interesting that each statement just happened to coincide with the left's political interests when made.


This is the usual BS from Marshall, conflating all liberals into one all-encompassing boogie-man.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Dust Bunny Queen said...
As as family, we made the decision to "pull the plug".

This is the same rationale you use in deciding whether to junk your old car in lieu of a new one.


Did you really 'make' this decision. The car analogy is an interesting one. Most people have no clue how cars work and rely entirely on their mechanic for advice.

The human body is vastly more complex than a car and the diagnostic tools are not as good. Relatives rely completely on the advice of their doctors, who are themselves often working in the dark, depending on the illness and the statistical nature of the prognosis. The particular case you discuss was probably straightforward clinically if not emotionally because there was massive head trauma but you relied entirely on a team of doctors for that information. In principle they could have deceived you completely.

There is nothing inherently wrong with trying to establish broad 'best-practice' guidelines for medical procedures. It is simply a panel of MDs trying to distill all the available experimental and clinical evidence in order to funnel clinical practice towards what appears to be the optimum approach at any given time.

Unknown said...

considering , arm, that you all mouth the same tired cliched talking points, in unison, you are all pretty much a frightening bunch. You like your tyranny, collectively.

bagoh20 said...

I was told I was terminal once. The tumor in my liver was too large, and according to the criteria established, I was not allowed to get a transplant - my chances of success were too slim (statistically).

Fortunately, I had private insurance and private doctors who didn't feel comfortable accepting those rules. They tried some creative and unproven chemo techniques to shrink the tumor down so that it would fit under the rules and at least get me on the transplant list. A long shot, but certainly worth it to me.

My doctors were willing to try it, and the insurance never even hiccuped, but just gave instant approval for the expensive and thoroughly unpleasant procedure. The rest is history 7 years past now.

I dread the thought of that happening with the likes of Sebbellus making hard and fast rules to control costs. Since then I have and will cause millions in taxes to be paid to a government that I believe would have forced my doctors to let me die under a similar situation if they were calling the shots, which may still be ahead for me and many others. I know I won't have the same coverage I had. That's gone now.

bagoh20 said...

That coverage cost less than $2500/yr, of which my employer paid the majority. No maximum, no deductible, $10 copay.

Unknown said...

It won't be long until we all will be required to ask some gov entity permission for all sorts of medical decisions. Not just life and death. Oh and just take a pain pill and stop your whining.

Unknown said...

According to the collective left, bags, your insurance wasn't good enough.
ps- I know I speak for everyone when I say how glad we are you made it through that.

Michael Haz said...

Is this how we want to ethically ration health care. Based not on the person has to offer, based not on a lifetime of memories and experiences, based not on the value of that person as a living soul.....but based on their intrinsic dollar value to the government?

Nailed it. We are now only worth what we can produce for the government. When we can no longer produce, we are not worth keeping alive. It's new new slavery.

bagoh20 said...

I don't oppose Obamacare because I don't want to pay more - I would to cover people who can't afford it, but I'd prefer not to be allowed to die for the privilege.

Of course if Barack Obama told me not to worry about that, then I'd trust him, and feel much better....NOT.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Bagoh20 there is an article "The Median Isn't the Message" by Stephen Jay Gould that addresses your situation better than I could. He also had an essentially terminal cancer diagnosis and lived to tell about it, at least until he got another completely unrelated cancer.

Cancer as you are not doubt well aware is one where the statistical diagnosis can be somewhat misleading. Elizabeth Edwards, John Edwards wife, had a cancer with a 80% five year survival chance. She died after a few years. She no doubt received as good or better medical than you did. Luck plays a big role here, there is considerable pure randomness in the genetic mutations underlying the cancer.

bagoh20 said...

Thanks, April. I really like how it turned out too. I still smell bad, but at least I can bat away the flies.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

April Apple said...
According to the collective left, bags, your insurance wasn't good enough.


This is untrue. My insurance and the vast majority of insurance policies are unaffected by the ACA. This doesn't mean that there are not a large number if not a large percentage of policies that are affected.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Relatives rely completely on the advice of their doctors, who are themselves often working in the dark, depending on the illness and the statistical nature of the prognosis.

Of course. Nothing is completely cut and dried. Bago's case shows this. The doctors are doing their best case or worse case recommendations.

I would far far more want to rely on the advice of the doctor who is looking me in the eyes than the governmental medical equivalent of the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

bagoh20 said...
I would to cover people who can't afford it, but I'd prefer not to be allowed to die for the privilege.


The supposition here is that clinical practice is going to dramatically change after implementation of the ACA. No one that I know of thinks this will be the case. This is largely about insurance not clinical practice.

Hospitals and individual MDs fight hard to get their survival rates as high as possible. In this limited sense it is a competitive market system.

Unknown said...

On a plane. Gotta shut down the dumb phone.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

According to the collective left, bags, your insurance wasn't good enough.

This is untrue.

Really? I bet you have an employer sponsored plan that has been delayed from showing you the affect of Obamacare. You aren't feeling or seeing it because Obama gave dispensation and waved his magic wand to not let the changes go into effect on certain groups.

Do you have children? Do you currently carry pediatric dental care? Are you married and of childbearing age? Do you have maternity care on your policy? Are you forced to pay for substance abuse counseling? Can you choose what size of deductible or out of pocket limit you can have? Have you asked your employer about the Cadillac plan tax.

Lem said...

On a plane. Gotta shut down the dumb phone.

Have a safe flight.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

RE: clinical practice changing: No one that I know of thinks this will be the case. This is largely about insurance not clinical practice.

Hmmmm. You might want to ask your doctor about how the new rules, regulations, and endless reporting is changing the way that he/she is able to practice. The computerized reporting. The asking of questions that have nothing to do with the reason you are there. The inability to treat you or talk about other things than the reason you are seeing him/her.

Our family physician has stated that he is closing his general practice. He will still be available for emergency room duty, but will no longer have an office or practice.

He also states that the specialists to which he refers, generally in Southern Ca, have closed or are closing their practices and moving into Mexico, which is just a hop skip and jump away. SO your urologist, heart specialist, eye surgeon etc....will be in Mexico. Those that aren't moving are ceasing to accept insurance of any kind and are on a cash only basis.

Nope....no changes.

bagoh20 said...

My cancer came back a couple years ago, and required the removal of a rib. Again, expensive, but also again, not even the slightest delay by my insurance - instant approval.

Through all this, I never had to deal with my insurance company. They never asked anything of me, drop me, or fight it in any way. I really can't imagine how it could be better.

Now, I'm doing great, I've got no problems or disability at all. I don't expect that to last, and that's what scares me about the government getting involved. It was easier for me to get surgery than to get a new truck registered at the DMV.

bagoh20 said...

" No one that I know of thinks this will be the case."

What was their thinking on the Obamacare rollout?

Look, there will be fewer doctors who will be less incentivised and have to handle many more people. It's not hard to figure out.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

You have had a tough time Bags. My sympathies go out to you. I am glad that the insurance covered everything for you. Imagine doing the same thing without insurance, you would be bankrupt and/or dead.

To argue that medical practice is like other goods and services is unrealistic. I may never own that Maserati, as much as I might covet it, but this is a loss that has no meaningful effect on my standard of living or longevity. The same cannot be said for some of the medical care I have received.

Michael Haz said...

Hospitals and individual MDs fight hard to get their survival rates as high as possible.

I had a conversation about this today with the orthopod who was injecting goo into my wife's cartilage-free knees.

He says the outcome rates favor the MDs and hospital who take the easy cases. The MDs and hospitals who take the difficult cases will have higher mortality rates because of the higher risk patients. They are also the most skilled providers.

bagoh20 said...

From what I've seen so far, even when the health care of most people in the nation has seriously deteriorated from this law, which now has pages of regulation in the millions, we won't be hearing any apologies, or seeing much self-reflection or humility. There will just be demands from the same people to eliminate private insurance altogether to fix it, with the same promises, and the same unflinching confidence about that too.

bagoh20 said...

You have had a tough time Bags...."

Not at all. I'm the luckiest guy I know, and I never stop feeling it. You mostly forget the hard times, and what's left is awesome. Thanks for the kind words, but you can see why I'm not fond of the changes we are embarking on.

I've also paid for and managed the health insurance for hundreds of people with nothing but good results. I've never seen any of the horror stories among the people I've done this with.

I've also known a lot of homeless and destitute people, and even among them, I've only seen the old system take care of them, usually for free.

I think the worst situation was for people who made a little money, and then refused to use any of it for insurance. I've known a few of those who ended up with big bills to pay and just gradually paid them down over years, but that's a crazy way to go to me.

These things could have been remedied much better. The Republicans had better plans that were ignored out of pure ideology.

edutcher said...

Note, por favor, the same Troll who dismissed Miss Sarah as Caribou Barbie and said the death panels didn't exist now can't seem to bring himself to admit she was right.

I love the smell of shaudenfreude in the evening.

AnUnreasonableTroll said...

So Halperin says, The Affordable Care Act contains provisions ... to decide which critically-ill patients receive care and which won't.

Does anyone seriously believe that those same decisions aren't currently made on a daily basis. This is business as usual. Many critically ill patients are terminal, further treatment simply prolongs their pain and suffering.


But therein lies the rub, dear Yorick.

Those decisions are cleared by the family after consultation with the physician(s), sometimes at the physician's suggestion, sometimes at the family.

Hospital or nursing home personnel, acting in loco IPAB, who do this on their own end up in the Jack Kevorkian wing of the state pen.

Michael Haz said...

But...the IPAB peeps get to say "No treatment for you!!" whenever they damn well please without regard to what the patient, the family or the treating physicians want.

Remember last month when Sebellius told that mom that her 13 year old daughter couldn't have a lung transplant? That's how it will be.

Michael Haz said...

Of course if you are a big donor to someone's election campaign, there'll be plenty of medicine for you.

Methadras said...

Is it just me or is ARM nothing more than a patronizing rancid little scumbag with little to no scruples in being nothing more than a tool for the left. ARM you fucking reek of the poisonous ideology you defend. It's unbelievable the utter mouthpiece leftist garbage you spew.

AReasonableMan said...

I also hold you in the highest regard, Methadras. Best holiday wishes.