Allocating, Not Rationing? My Foot!
If you’re anything like me, you’re angry over the Supreme Court’s healthcare ruling; and it has nothing to do with insurance. I’m concerned for my children.
I’m sick of the liberal ignoratio elenchi proclaiming everyone who opposes the law wants poor and elderly people to die. If anything, the promoters of this awful law support that.
I’m tired of them and their talking points that do nothing except continually and purposefully mislead the public into placation. You wouldn't know honor and integrity if it bit them in the behind. SHUT UP AND SIT DOWN!
The Supreme Court proclaimed what this law has always been – an increase in taxes, some 21 new ones in all, and a way to cement future Democrat votes. End of discussion.
Now, get your head out of the tainted food trough of Chris Matthews, Nancy Pelosi or whatever progressive you are currently idolizing. Your future safety is dependent on your learning something instead of eating the pabulum fed you by the media and political minions.
What those of us who have read the bill don’t want are the repercussions of the law. There will be rationing, only it will be called “allocating.” That way it‘s more palatable, don’t you agree?
Here’s why rationing/allocating will happen for dummies: You and your friends have built a boat. You have 50 people on board with one captain and enough food and supplies to take care of them. Five of your passengers are elderly, five are disabled and two have diminished mental capacity. It isn’t perfect, but it’s working.
You know there are others out in the world in need of boats and captains. You petition your legislators to come up with a way to make boats that are affordable and available for everyone while incentivizing others to become boat captains.
Instead of immediately addressing the issues of cost, competition and more captains, the legislators decide to hand you the laws that force you to put others on your already at capacity boat.
Because you have been forced to add passengers, the captain must obey the new laws but still protect his boat by off-loading some of the elderly and disabled to make room for younger, more productive people.
Being forced by law, he has no choice but to sacrifice some by setting them adrift on life preserves with a cup of water, some bread and wishing them well.
This healthcare law is a boat, only capable in its current form, of assisting some. Right now the majority of those in most need are safely on the boat. The government, however, is forcing those not in dire need to overcrowd the current system. The 20 year old with the flu will be allocated care over the 65 year old with the same condition. The 20 year old has many more years left to contribute to society; the 65 year old has completed his life. Make no mistake that the 20 year old will get preference over the new born and toddler as well. They haven’t proven their worth yet. Read Cass R. Sunstein and Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel if you doubt this.
I also urge everyone to read the Affordable Health Care Act. I’ll start you off with this. The act created what is called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) (page 1275). Some like to call this the “death panel.” Certainly the phrase “death panel” is hyperbole; but, guess what, it’s accurate.
What does IPAB do? It’s meant to rein in healthcare costs when needed. From the White House web site:
“Key to these savings is a proposal to strengthen the Independent Payment Advisory Board – IPAB, which was created by the Affordable Care Act. Here’s how IPAB works: Fifteen experts including doctors and patient advocates would be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate to serve on IPAB.”
Do you trust the government to choose these people? I don’t. Would they have the ability to do this via “recess appointment?”
Further: “IPAB would recommend policies to Congress to help Medicare provide better care at lower costs. This would include ideas on coordinating care, getting rid of waste in the system, incentivizing best practices and prioritizing primary care.”
Haven’t we tried this? How’d that work out? I’ve previously reported on Medicare paying millions of dollars for one wheelchair.
IPAB is promoted as a “backstop” but will it end up like the Environmental Protection Agency of the medical field? Rationing will happen. However, it isn’t called it “rationing;” it’s called “allocating.”
We already have the government informing patients they no longer need to have yearly mammograms and prostate screening. It already switched the allocation regarding mammograms from 40 to 50 years. That’s 10 years worth of savings. Recently a government entity said prostate screenings were more harmful than helpful, no need to continue them. See how it works?
According to the CATO Institute, the unelected IPAB panel will have unlimited power to impose taxes and ration healthcare for all Americans regardless of who is paying for the insurance. Yes, that means you, Mr. & Mrs. Blue Collar who pay 100% of your premium.
What’s worse? “IPAB truly is independent, but in the worst sense of the word. It wields power independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.”
I’ll repeat! The purpose of this panel is to restrain spending through “allocated” care. Oh, I also need to mention once 2017 rolls around you will never be able to undo the IPAB. It's in the law.
Socialist medicine in other countries demonstrated that “allocated” care begins with the most vulnerable in a society. While President Barack Obama is busy bribing the young to support this policy through with “carrots," government entities are already informing the public what it “needs” regarding healthcare and forcing organizations like the Roman Catholic Church to submit to its will.
If the extremely powerful and wealthy Roman Catholic Church is having a hard time fighting submission, how well do you think you, the lone patient, will fare?
Donald Berwick, who ran President Obama’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, was advised by Mr. Sunstein (Regulatory Czar) regarding the Health Care Act. Mr. Sunstein is known to have said: "I urge that the government should indeed focus on life-years rather than lives." Meaning, can you still be of use to the Nanny State.
Dr. Emanuel, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s brother and chief medical advisor to President Obama, supports and speaks about a “complete lives system,” which supports allocating (not rationing, of course) medical care by age and is not considered discriminatory. Quoting Dr. Emanuel: "You see, at 65 or older, you've had more life years than a 25 year old. As such, the latter can be more deserving of cost-efficient health care than older folks."
Dr. Emanuel’s paper “Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions” sheds light on how “allocation” would take place “according to their core ethical values. “Treating people equally while favoring the worst off, maximizing total benefits, promoting and rewarding social usefulness.”
Did you get that last one? There are graphs and charts in his paper to assist your understanding of how the formula works.
Who do you believe, the manipulated/tive media or the words of those advising and writing the laws coupled with what is already happening around you?
Sink or swim, it’s your boat – for now.
Affordable Health Care Act: http://housedocs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf
National Review Online article: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/302876/ipab-obamacare-s-super-legislature-michael-f-cannon
Ezekiel Emanuel Paper: http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/PIIS0140673609601379.pdf