Appearing at a town hall in his home state of Iowa, Sen. Chuck Grassley told a crowd of more than 300 that they were correct to fear that the government would "pull the plug on grandma."
Yeah...you're so right
No to Chemo, Yes to Assisted Suicide
- Thread starter Freedom4all
- Start date
Yeah...you're so right
=================================================================
Ok then. Since you continue to post blog versions, here is the actual text:
Full PDF of the version you are distorting is here. The portion I pasted below starts on Page 424 of the PDF file from the House Ways and Means Committee.
Sec. 1233. Advance Care Planning Consultation
N
nuclearfission
Guest
Sooooo "connected" to Government.....Hmmmmm?? You have a lot of time on your hands their, Techy boy!!
After all that space wasted, like the THOUSANDS of pages of Legislation written that our Representatives don't read!!!!!!!!!!.......the bottom line remains the same. Government run agencies are a mess to the core.....FAA, USPS, FDA, SSA, VA......plus many, many others. all red tape, and nightmares to productivity. Do these and other entities provide a beneficial service/value? Of course they do. BUT, run by government VS private enterprise is the difference. Government sucks the taxpayer dollar.
I will take the last two posts as your admission that what you have been parroting does not exist.
As for your quote from Grassley on the dropping of the offer to cover the living will counseling:
Now you post an article that says they dropped the provision that was originated by Republican Senator Johnny Isakson???
The origins of this came from none other than the GOP. It originated from the Schaivo case:
Flashback to 2005:
Source
Here is the latest on the dropping of the issue:
Article
This not an opinion. I am only posting facts.
I know where you are headed with this.
I know you are going to remain civil and above the fray; as you always have my friend.
I hope you realize there are about five versions in Senate and they have not yet come together with a final ready for vote.
House has and almost voted if it were not for many Americans of all political persuasions contacting their representatives and stopping the vote until sometime later this year if at all now.
The House version is what is being quoted and is what the town hall meetings revolve around.
Maybe you could do a spot on CBS evening news then and explain to all these Americans how wrong they are,but I did overlook the fact that they are in fact all Republican operatives working for the drug companies....
BTW....did you see the bit about Obama making a deal with Pharma behind Congress'
back?
Flying Titan
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2003
- Messages
- 773
- Reaction score
- 0
Piney -
Your earlier post was an outstanding presentation of a market-driven approach. While there are several elements of it that I think are problematic, at least it's a legitimate argument. It is intellectually honest and you can make the case that it should be considered as the way to fix the current health care mess that we're in, in terms of both long-term cost and access. That said, the Dell's of the world and elected republicans aren't offering any such arguments or proposals in this debate. I wish they would. My whole point is that they're simply making up big lies to support the status quo and the current health insurance bureaucrats who are causing the cost and access problems in the system right now.
Separately, while you seem to make the claim that our government can't do anything right, I can't figure out why you want to ignore all of the times that government has gotten it right. FEMA was the model for disaster response, worldwide, until Bush & "Brownie" got ahold of it. You point out "Katrina"; I would point out "Andrew." And I still challenge you to walk into any FedEx store and try to send a letter for less than 50 cents. FedEx is a great American company, but it's motivated by self-interest, not the public interest - and that's the way it should be. It's also why we have an effective US postal service. There are countless more examples which I will not begin to re-hash. My point is that there are some things that are simply in the public interest (see my earlier post, if necessary) and should not be subject to the whims of the market or the self-guided motives of the private sector. Those motives are usually a very good thing, but not in some instances. I think most of the industrialized nations of the world have shown that health care coverage is one of those instances - full access, better outcomes, lower costs.
Your earlier post was an outstanding presentation of a market-driven approach. While there are several elements of it that I think are problematic, at least it's a legitimate argument. It is intellectually honest and you can make the case that it should be considered as the way to fix the current health care mess that we're in, in terms of both long-term cost and access. That said, the Dell's of the world and elected republicans aren't offering any such arguments or proposals in this debate. I wish they would. My whole point is that they're simply making up big lies to support the status quo and the current health insurance bureaucrats who are causing the cost and access problems in the system right now.
Separately, while you seem to make the claim that our government can't do anything right, I can't figure out why you want to ignore all of the times that government has gotten it right. FEMA was the model for disaster response, worldwide, until Bush & "Brownie" got ahold of it. You point out "Katrina"; I would point out "Andrew." And I still challenge you to walk into any FedEx store and try to send a letter for less than 50 cents. FedEx is a great American company, but it's motivated by self-interest, not the public interest - and that's the way it should be. It's also why we have an effective US postal service. There are countless more examples which I will not begin to re-hash. My point is that there are some things that are simply in the public interest (see my earlier post, if necessary) and should not be subject to the whims of the market or the self-guided motives of the private sector. Those motives are usually a very good thing, but not in some instances. I think most of the industrialized nations of the world have shown that health care coverage is one of those instances - full access, better outcomes, lower costs.
Seatacus
Veteran
That's because FEDEX is not currently structured to do that. Give FEDEX the tax breaks the post office has and I bet they could compete easily.
Garfield1966
Veteran
Would have been nice had made at least one reference to any of the health bills currently before Congress to back up any of his claims.
Also, not that this has any bearing on his unsubstantiated op-ed article, but this was the same guy who was on the BoD of AIG when just before they nearly went belly up. That fact does not put him on my "gee I really respect his opinion" list.
Flying Titan
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2003
- Messages
- 773
- Reaction score
- 0
So Dell, Let me get this straight...
Based on your post above, you are in favor of "high cost, low value" treatments. You're opposed to "performance measures" for determining which procedures work best and therefore should be covered. Really????
Funny, "performance measures" are EXACTLY the approach used by the Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic and other medical centers that are unquestionably the best that the country has to offer. They are constantly evaluating which procedures work best and which ones fall short. Both of these medical centers frequently point out that some of the most expensive procedures do not live up to their initial promises and they drop those from their options to treat patients. For example, there are multiple ways to treat colon cancer. Both the Cleveland Clinic and the Mayo Clinic have panels review which ones would be the best options. It's smart medicine that produces the best results. Of course, I'm sure that you think know better than they do.
It's too bad that you so clearly want us to spend more, get worse results, and cover fewer people.
Based on your post above, you are in favor of "high cost, low value" treatments. You're opposed to "performance measures" for determining which procedures work best and therefore should be covered. Really????
Funny, "performance measures" are EXACTLY the approach used by the Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic and other medical centers that are unquestionably the best that the country has to offer. They are constantly evaluating which procedures work best and which ones fall short. Both of these medical centers frequently point out that some of the most expensive procedures do not live up to their initial promises and they drop those from their options to treat patients. For example, there are multiple ways to treat colon cancer. Both the Cleveland Clinic and the Mayo Clinic have panels review which ones would be the best options. It's smart medicine that produces the best results. Of course, I'm sure that you think know better than they do.
It's too bad that you so clearly want us to spend more, get worse results, and cover fewer people.
Has he raised your taxes on anything?
Freedom4all
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Messages
- 767
- Reaction score
- 0
I firmly believe that due to recent events our boy Obama's dream of socialist medicine nightmare is deader then dead. Along with the Democrats and the power they hold in Washington. There has been a huge backlash and its not only coming from the Republicans, its within their own Democratic party.
The dem's have all the votes they need to ram this down our throat but cant due to the sudden implosion of the democratic party. Its actually quit amusing as they scramble day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute.
Reform is possible if they just get out of they way. They want to micro-manage it without considering any other ideas.
I foresee a majority of them losing office in 2010 and as predicted Obama will be just like Carter, a one term (trick) pony.
The dem's have all the votes they need to ram this down our throat but cant due to the sudden implosion of the democratic party. Its actually quit amusing as they scramble day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute.
Reform is possible if they just get out of they way. They want to micro-manage it without considering any other ideas.
I foresee a majority of them losing office in 2010 and as predicted Obama will be just like Carter, a one term (trick) pony.
dapoes
Veteran
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 3,543
- Reaction score
- 2,716
Similar threads
